[Live-demo] [live-demo] Kick-starting OSGeoLive 7.5
gcpp.kalxas at gmail.com
Tue Dec 10 13:32:47 PST 2013
FYI I have updated the package list spreadsheet with a "deb packaging"
Projects providing deb files: 36/67 (54%)
Projects not providing deb files: 31/67 (46%) (7 of them - 10% - provide
WAR packaging which could easily ported to deb)
On 12/10/2013 10:52 PM, Angelos Tzotsos wrote:
> Hi Cameron,
> On 12/09/2013 01:17 PM, Cameron Shorter wrote:
>> Hi Angelos,
>> Thanks for kick starting the process.
>> Before we start the build process for 7.5, I suggest we discuss the
>> "Has OSGeo-Live reached a level of maturity where it would be best
>> served by annual releases instead of 6 month releases"?
> In my opinion the answer is yes and no:
> Yes, the project is much more mature now that it was 1 or 2 years ago.
> I expect it to become a bit more unstable when we move to Xubuntu
> 14.04, hopefully just for a little while...
> No, 1 year release is not serving the project well. Actually there is
> no Linux distro out there having such a release cycle and the reason
> is very simple: free and open source is constantly changing, new
> features get implemented and users want the new features as soon as
> possible: Ubuntu (6 months), Fedora (6 months), openSUSE (8 months),
> Arch (rolling), Mint (6 months). The only exception is Debian (~2
> years), but that is a different story, and there are unstable
> repositories available.
>> The logic behind this question is:
>> 1. OSGeo-Live is orders of magnitude larger than a few few releases,
>> which 3 times as many applications, and with each application
>> maintaining more documentation, as well as maintaining multiple
> My proposal here is to split the project (since it grew too big):
> - OSGeoLive ppa (UbuntuGIS or perhaps other)
> - OSGeoLive apt repository (for packages not fitting under the
> Launchpad rules, eg. Java binary packages)
> - OSGeoLive docs and translations (should be maintained separately and
> create a deb file periodically e.g. for every new commit)
> - OSGeoLive data (also should be packaged in a deb file)
> - OSGeoLive build scripts (for anything not in a deb file, e.g. the
> actual build files)
> This would also simplify things:
> All projects must provide deb packages, else they are not included in
> the 8.0 release. So 7.9 will be a transition release...
>> 2. As such our critical mass for turning over a release requires more
>> effort than before.
> If we manage to have everything as a deb file, actually this will be
> MUCH easier, plus we can upgrade between releases...
>> 3. However, the good news is that the quality and stability of
>> OSGeo-Live applications has improved substantially, and as such I'd
>> argue that releases don't need to be turned over as often.
> Yes this is true.
Remote Sensing Laboratory
National Technical University of Athens
More information about the Osgeolive