Important Reader Question
Comments(13) OK, I’m excited to announce that the new version of Portable GIS, complete with the latest versions (as of today- I have to draw the line somewhere) of all the software, is now in testing phase and pretty much ready to release. It’s a bit slicker that the previous version, and comes with some extra software and utilities.
Here is my problem: the last release weighed in at just less that 1GB downloaded, but the new one looks like coming in at approx 1.6GB though I’m going to zip it up in an exe which might help a bit. Software tends to increase in size from version to version, so some “bloat” is unavoidable, but is 1.6GB excessive?
I have a couple of options that I can take to reduce the size. The first is to strip out programmes, so that, for instance, there is only 1 desktop GIS package, or only 1 map server package. The second is to turn this setup into a Portable App, which gives me options to compress the files. I have previously been reluctant to go down the second route because I want the files in Portable GIS to be as similar to those in a standard download as possible, so that people can dig in and see what’s going on and use Portable GIS as a spring board to installing the apps themselves. I worry that “Portable-ising” the files will alter them in some way, but if someone can reassure me about that it’s something to consider.
So, questions:
- Is 1.6GB excessive for a download of this type?
- Should I only provide one desktop package and one map server?
- Should I turn Portable GIS into a fully fledged portable app?
Thanks for your feedback!
1.6 GB is rather large for a download, but only if you offer it up as a standard download. If you can put it up as an FTP download, or as a bittorrent, 1.6 GB isn’t prohibitive.
Yes, 1.6GB is absolutely too large.
The only downloads which approach that size are full distributions of operating systems along with their popular programs and even they rarely require downloading more than a 740MB CD image. Major software packages such as integrated development environments only require a few hundred megabytes at the very most.
Looks like you need to do some cleanup or modularization. Good luck.
–adrian
Hi Adrian,
It’s a little disingenuous to compare a collection of software to an operating system download that has been compressed into a disk image, and to be honest a lot of operating system downloads are now too big to fit on a cd and require a dvd.
The size is just the size of all the packages plus the documentation and small amount of code required to provide a combined menu system, and it’s already as clean as it can be. That’s why stripping programmes out is one of the choices.
Modularisation is another option, that I might consider, but I still like the idea of one big combined package too.
Do you have any experience of portable apps and what that might change/add/take away from the code?
Jo
Actually, I’d be inclined to say its not too big. As things stand, 1.6 GB isn’t a barrier to it being GIS on a stick… 2 GB USB sticks, SD cards, etc are common enough. 1.6 GB becomes a problem for download time/bandwidth (so zipping might be a solution). Bittorrent might help this, if you can find people to seed (and if my IT dept doesn’t flip out at the presence of Bittorrent traffic), as could FTP access.
Basically, I think it comes down to the purpose you have in mind for Portable GIS, and our answers will probably reflect the use we have in mind for it. I’d suggest you tack on a question 4 of what our use-cases are.
To me, having not yet made a significant jump to these programs, the fact “that people can dig in and see what’s going on and use Portable GIS as a spring board to installing the apps themselves” is something I really like, and have recommended Portable GIS because of. I also very much like the options of different desktop packages (although server-wise, I like geoserver). Your package is probably the easiest way to try the different programs out there.
So… my take on it:
1) No.
2) No.
3) … if it wouldn’t modify the files etc… sure.
and,
4) Use: Easy way to try (and propogate) different OpenSource GIS packages, especially as a stack that leads us from data entry all the way to a webGIS.
With 2 GB thumb drives selling in the US for $5 or less, I don’t think size is as big an issue as it used to be.
I am thoroughly excited for this new release – thank you for your work Jo!
Answers: 1)No, 1.6GB is not an excessive size. It would be nice if the package ends up as a torrent. 2)Yes, I think QGIS and GeoServer (like was on the last version) may be all that are necessary. (Were those the two you were thinking?) 3) I agree, only “…if it wouldn’t modify the files etc…” – “so that people can dig in and see what’s going on”.
Well size its not a big problem.
But as Joe i agree that GRASS is probably unnecessary to this distribution.
QGIS or uDIG and MapServer or GeoServer would suffice.
QGIS has capabilites to produce maps to MapServer and uDIG can create .SLD files that GeoServer can use.
I´m pretty sure you can choose one way or the other. Maybe 2 different packages?
Hi,
my answers:
1) no, but please use torrent
2)no
3) yes
Thank you,
a
Hi Jo, should we maybe try to setup a torrent for this? It could help – makes it easy to pause/resume/etc – spread the bandwidth on several sources, and so on. Could still provide an FTP alternative.
Maybe we could also put it on our new openarchaeology.net ?
Hi,
Personally, I have no issue with a 1.6 gb dl., yes it is bigger than most linux distros but 1.6 gb is not a lot for most people these days.
Maybe you could offer it as a torrent DL as well, not that that makes any difference to the total DL size. Might take some weight off you in terms of bandwidth though.
Very keen to try this out, I have looked into some of these apps before but never used them formally.
Thanks everyone! I’m currently looking into some installers that will compress the size down anyhow, and then it looks like we’ll go for a torrent as well as the ftp and http download options (thanks Yann!)
Jo
1. No. Probably not an unmanageable size, considering that anyone who would use this knows what they are getting into.
2. No. You probably have to have both uDig and QGIS. They are different enough and both are embedded into enough workflows that you cut off a large part of your target audience if you drop either one. No opinion on the mapserver.
3. No opinion.
I also agree with George regarding GRASS. GRASS is not something that someone would suddenly find themselves using on an ad hoc basis (of course, if someone is, I stand corrected). I also would agree that a parallel lighter version with some heavier packages removed is useful.
(POV: I am working at using uDig as part of a Disaster Assessment workflow in my Red Cross chapter. If you had a lightweight Portable GIS with uDig, I would have the whole team put it on a stick.)
I think the size is getting a little hard to download. Maybe have a “desktop” portable GIS version that doesn’t have the server or database version for people who just want that. I do agree that uDig should probably be added.