[pdal] Conda for official Mac/Windows PDAL packages?

[Jean-Francois Prieur]

As a python user under windows, I much prefer a Conda solution over
OSGeo4w. Thank you for all your work

JF

On Fri, Jun 1, 2018 at 9:18 AM Kristian Evers <kreve at sdfe.dk> wrote:

> Howard,
>
>
>
> As a user of both OS X, Windows and occasionally PDAL, I would welcome
> such a change. As a user I find both Homebrew and OSGeo4W less than
> optimal. Homebrew is generally a nice environment but it has proven
> difficult to maintain the various OSGeo packages in a way that is easily
> compatible with the core homebrew set of packages.
>
> As a developer/maintainer I unfortunately find OSGeo4W very fragile at the
> moment. Primarily because of the few people who are actively maintaining it
> (it is more or less a one person operation it seems). On top of that it is
> very difficult to be a “drive-by” contributor because ultimately SSH access
> is required. Homebrew works fairly well from a maintainer perspective, but
> when it comes to the OSGeo packages it is still problematic.
>
>
>
> The conda forge ecosystem removes all of the above problems and in my
> experience everything just works. Both from a user and maintainer
> perspective. So for what it’s worth, a +1 from me.
>
>
>
> /Kristian
>
>
>
> *Fra:* pdal [mailto:pdal-bounces at lists.osgeo.org] *På vegne af *Howard
> Butler
> *Sendt:* 1. juni 2018 14:53
> *Til:* pdal <pdal at lists.osgeo.org>
> *Emne:* [pdal] Conda for official Mac/Windows PDAL packages?
>
>
>
> All,
>
>
>
> Brad's recently announced [1] Conda Forge packages for PDAL proved wildly
> successful for our recent FOSS4GNA workshop [2]. The current PDAL packaging
> story is rather messy, with OSGeo4W (64-bit only) available for Windows,
> Homebrew for OSX, and Debian/RedHat packages being provided by the
> distributions. Docker is also in the mix, although that's a separate thread
>
>
>
> The OSGeo4W package creation process is now fully automated through PDAL's
> AppVeyor continuous integration, but the upload, tagging, and release of
> the package is still a manual activity. OSGeo4W can also be very brittle
> for people, especially as an installation, and it often lacks the refresh
> of underlying system support packages on which everything is based.
>
>
>
> Homebrew PDAL packages for OSX are also available, but they are only
> available to 1.6 and installations can be fickle, especially when it comes
> to updating.
>
>
>
> The appeal of Conda Forge as a packager is a single upstream for packaging
> efforts, a build system that doesn't require our project to maintain it
> (currently done with OSGeo4W), and convenient usability of the packages for
> the users.  Another strong appeal of Conda Forge is the workflow of package
> creation, changes, patches, and refresh can be done through typical
> pull-request workflow. OSGeo4W updates require SSH access to a machine
> (that is sometimes down), and manual button mashing with careful manual
> post validation.
>
>
>
> I'm proposing that we drop the OSGeo4W and Homebrew package support in
> exchange for the Conda Forge ecosystem. I'm interested in hearing from
> users of the Homebrew and OSGeo4W packages on that topic, however. Would
> this drastically upend your workflow? Make things simpler? If these
> packaging approaches are critical for you, can you step forward to take
> over their care with some hand-off?
>
>
>
> If there's no significant objection, PDAL 1.8 will target Conda as the
> primary packaging environment for Mac/Windows.
>
>
>
> Howard
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> [1] https://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/pdal/2018-April/001559.html
>
> [2]
> https://2018.foss4g-na.org/session/point-cloud-processing-and-analysis-pdal
> _______________________________________________
> pdal mailing list
> pdal at lists.osgeo.org
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/pdal
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/pdal/attachments/20180601/b622bf86/attachment-0001.html>