[Live-demo] Last call for new projects wishing to be includedon OSGeo-Live

[Cameron Shorter]

Kip,
That is good to hear. Could you please answer our questions we ask of 
new projects and send through to this live email list.
http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Live_GIS_Disc_Apply

Answering these questions gives our community the opportunity to ask you 
any questions and make sure the project fits the profile that we are 
looking for from new projects.

On 7/06/2011 1:29 AM, Streithorst, Kip wrote:
> I would like Opticks to be included, but still in the process of switching over to CMake and we have yet to attempt a Linux 32-bit build of Opticks.  Here's hoping we can be ready for the next go round.
>
> Thanks,
> Kip
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Cameron Shorter [mailto:cameron.shorter at gmail.com]
> Sent: Saturday, June 04, 2011 9:24 AM
> To: live-demo at lists.osgeo.org; Mark Lucas; Streithorst, Kip
> Subject: Re: [Live-demo] Last call for new projects wishing to be includedon OSGeo-Live
>
> Mark, Kip,
> As suggested by Alex, would the Optics project like to be included on
> the OSGeo-Live DVD? http://live.osgeo.org
>
> Details about getting an application on OSGeo-Live are listed below:
> http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Live_GIS_Add_Project
>
> On 04/06/11 10:13, Alex Mandel wrote:
>> On 06/03/2011 04:54 PM, maplabs at light42.com wrote:
>>>>> I recall some disagreement about this policy in the past
>>>> the disagreement re unpackaged postgis in the past was not about
>>>> policy, it was about technicality: there were unresolved file
>>>> system conflicts between the two proposed versions. policy just
>>>> stated that the stable/provided/packaged version won out in that
>>>> case.
>>>>
>>> I am very familiar with the layout of PostGIS, and somewhat with PostgreSQL
>>> (I say somewhat because it is a truly deep piece of work..)
>>> there were not "unresolved file  system conflicts between the two
>>> proposed versions"
>>> however, I am not a lawyer, linux distribution architect, nor enemy
>>>
>>> I am not eager to scrap over technicalities, so I bring this up now
>>> better to hash it out well before any deadlines
>>>
>>> there are a few goodies in PostGIS 2.0 that a lot of people will benefit
>>> from seeing
>>> once again, I suspect I will advocate for PostGIS 2.0 to be included
>>> I suspect PostGIS will be finished before the deadlines, but not much
>>> before
>>> I suspect that the packaging will not be ready in Ubuntu GIS
>>>
>>>     best regards from California
>>>      -Brian
>>>
>> Does Postgis 2.0 require Postgres 9? Natty still has 8.4, it is possible
>> to backport 9.0 from Oneiric but that takes someone doing it and posting
>> it to ubuntugis.
>>
>> I don't dispute the goodies for those in the know, but the more time we
>> spend custom tweaking each package the less we have to make the overall
>> experience better. So I'm going to stick to if it's ubuntugis or a
>> similar repo we'll take it, if it's source only just to get the newest
>> I'll pass till the next release. That is after all why we keep releasing
>> every 6 months.
>>
>> There is a parallel theme here, my goal is put versions on the disc that
>> the average user can go out and install on their own. So the existence
>> of a deb package is the key to win me over.
>>
>> We'll have to see how this one in particular plays out. If there's a
>> stable release by July I think it's possible.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Alex
>> _______________________________________________
>> Live-demo mailing list
>> Live-demo at lists.osgeo.org
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/live-demo
>> http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Live_GIS_Disc
>


-- 
Cameron Shorter
Geospatial Solutions Manager
Tel: +61 (0)2 8570 5050
Mob: +61 (0)419 142 254

Think Globally, Fix Locally
Geospatial Solutions enhanced with Open Standards and Open Source
http://www.lisasoft.com