[Qgis-developer] Processing: module duplications

[Victor Olaya]

Paolo, that sounds good to me

The basic and experimental modules that you propose are the current
simplified and advanced modes. We should work on a normal mode.

Let's discuss it here and maybe create a spreadsheet that we can edit to
select the list of modules to include

Thanks for the suggestions!


2014-06-23 19:06 GMT+02:00 G. Allegri <giohappy at gmail.com>:

> I've given a look to the list of Processing QGIS geoalgorithms and I've
> seen that all the tools from fTools seem to be there. I remembered that
> someone was missing, but it seems not to be true anymore. I wonder if it
> wouldn't be the case to drop fTools algorithms from Vector menu. It would
> help in avoiding confusion, imho.
>
> giovanni
>
>
> 2014-06-23 18:50 GMT+02:00 G. Allegri <giohappy at gmail.com>:
>
> Hi Paolo,
>> I agree with you, a cleaner organization of Processing tools is advisable
>> to reduce the confusion in users.
>> It's rather difficult to teach them in a clear way too! :)
>>
>> IMHO this reorganization should consider also the integration of other
>> sparse analysis/processing tools, like the ones under the Vector menu. I
>> know it depends on their implemention (and its feasibility in the present
>> Processing model), but it's one of the major sources of confusions or
>> users. A typical question: why we have the Processing toolbox and a Vector
>> menu, where some tools overlap, while other are only available under Vector
>> menu, and so not usable inside a Processing model/workflow?
>>
>> I hope we will find time (=money) to close this gap and, hopefully, have
>> most of the analysis tools under the same structure. Well... all but the
>> C++ ones :(
>>
>> giovanni
>>
>>
>> 2014-06-23 18:42 GMT+02:00 Paolo Cavallini <cavallini at faunalia.it>:
>>
>> Hi all.
>>> We are thinking about the future of Processing framework. The
>>> duplication shown among
>>> modules is certainly a good thing, as it allows richer analyses and more
>>> control and
>>> verification, but can be intimidating even for skilled GIS users.
>>> We have been discussed this before, but I came up with the conclusion
>>> that a
>>> reasonable approach would be to have three levels:
>>> * basic - only one choice, no overly complex modules
>>> * normal - all well tested modules, minimizing duplication
>>> * experimental - out in the wild, all modules.
>>> This would improve the user experience, and would require less
>>> maintenance by core devs.
>>> Of course the selection of the modules for the second category is rather
>>> complex, and
>>> would require much thinking.
>>> Opinions?
>>> All the best.
>>> --
>>> Paolo Cavallini - www.faunalia.eu
>>> Corsi QGIS e PostGIS: http://www.faunalia.eu/training.html
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Qgis-developer mailing list
>>> Qgis-developer at lists.osgeo.org
>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Giovanni Allegri
>> http://about.me/giovanniallegri
>> Twitter: https://twitter.com/_giohappy_
>> blog: http://blog.spaziogis.it
>> GEO+ geomatica in Italia http://bit.ly/GEOplus
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Giovanni Allegri
> http://about.me/giovanniallegri
> Twitter: https://twitter.com/_giohappy_
> blog: http://blog.spaziogis.it
> GEO+ geomatica in Italia http://bit.ly/GEOplus
>
> _______________________________________________
> Qgis-developer mailing list
> Qgis-developer at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-developer/attachments/20140623/7fc3b2a4/attachment-0001.html>