[Live-demo] OSGeoLive 9.5 status: pre-RC - Jupyter Notebooks

Cameron Shorter cameron.shorter at gmail.com
Mon Mar 7 14:17:51 PST 2016

Hi all,
I should clarify my statement below, (as has been to me off list), as it 
might appear that I'm implying a lack of future, or quality of notebooks.

My comments below relate to level of external testing and size of 
community who have reviewed Massimo's notebooks.

I think that Massimo has done an excellent job pioneering notebooks 
within the OSGeo-Live framework, and these notebooks provide a great 
platform from which to demonstrate OSGeo functionality.
I think our next step is to work toward bringing a groundswell of 
community behind the development of these notebooks.

My suggested approach differs a little with that proposed by Massimo, 
although I think we are aiming toward the same long term goal (of wide 
adoption and community maintenance of Notebooks within the OSGeo-Live 

I'm proposing that we release just a few of the Notebooks first, seek 
community feedback on this small subset, adapt if required. But most 
importantly build an OSGeo-Live notebook community and buy in before 
going too wide.

This question is still unresolved within the core OSGeo-Live team, and 
we need to make a decision fast, as our Release Candidate is due next 
Monday 14 March. Opinions from our OSGeo-Live community would be greatly 
appreciated so we can make a wise decision moving forward.

Warm regards, Cameron

On 7/03/2016 10:54 pm, Cameron Shorter wrote:
> Angelos, all,
> I concerned about how much new material we are attempting add related 
> to Jupyter notebooks, all at the last moment.
> With OSGeo-Live, we have built our reputation around quality and 
> stability, and I think we should be careful not to compromise that. We 
> will attract more users to Jupyter notebooks if they try one excellent 
> notebook, and look elsewhere for more, than if they try 10 notebooks 
> which almost work.
> So before adding a new Notebook, I suggest that it should be tested 
> start to finish, and then thoroughly reviewed  by the author, and then 
> at least one other person, preferably 2.
> Am I right in understanding that we are currently proposing to add ~ 
> 30 new notebooks? I'd be inclined to pick out 2 to 5 of these and 
> focus on getting just these working.
> (The remainder can be included on OSGeo-Live for testing and 
> workshops, just ensure that you can only find it if provided with the 
> correct URL)
> That said, who do we have available to help test notebooks? If you can 
> help out, please reply to this email, volunteering your services.
> On 7/03/2016 10:34 pm, Angelos Tzotsos wrote:
>> 2. Jupyter Notebooks: We currently have a git repository with 
>> notebooks to include in the final release and we also have an open 
>> pull request to merge the work from GSoC 2015 [5].
>> There is a special nightly build [6][7] including the GSoC notebooks.
>> We need to evaluate all our notebooks for this release and make a 
>> decision on the notebooks to be included.
>> Perhaps we need a team of volunteers to go through all notebooks and 
>> review them? Perhaps we need a spreadsheet listing all notebooks and 
>> their status? Thoughts? 

Cameron Shorter,
Software and Data Solutions Manager
Suite 112, Jones Bay Wharf,
26 - 32 Pirrama Rd, Pyrmont NSW 2009

P +61 2 9009 5000,  W www.lisasoft.com,  F +61 2 9009 5099

More information about the Osgeolive mailing list