[Xastir] Xastir 2.0 (next-gen?)

[Arnie Shore]

As a lurker on this list and not a user, I accept that this opinion won't
swing a lot of weight.  But, I really like the idea of a db engine of some
kind to be part of the next-gen mix.

Rationale:  I'm the Tickets CAD lead programmer,  which software has gotten
a good bit of play in the ARES/RACES world and where APRS plays a major role
in our tracking mobile units.  While we currently take position information
from aprs.fi, there's clear advantages in taking that from any nearby xastir
user, including the obvious one of operability in the absence of Internet
connectivity.  (Tickets has a 'no-internet' option.)

For a number of technical reasons, access by the Tickets server to a Xastir
db as  the buffer would be a much less demanding implementation than
otherwise.

Arnie Shore
Tickets CAD Project Team

~~~~_/)~~~~~~~~~_/)~~~~~~~~~_/)~~~~~~~~~_/)~~~~~~~~~_/)~~~~~~~

On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 4:07 PM, Craig Anderson <acraiga at pacbell.net> wrote:

> Hi all,
>        I haven't heard much discussion on the plans for Xastir 2.0, or the
> next-gen Xastir.  What I remember hearing was a much more heavy-weight
> GIS-style system complete with a Postgress database backend.  I have a few
> comments on this, but if the plans have changed you can disregard my
> ramblings, or clue me in.
>
> I have changed my perspective on the advisability of a more heavy-weight
> system with a database backend.  I think this would be a mistake because I
> don't think it would be improving the overall complexity level from the
> existing Xastir software mess, with it's problems of tracking so many
> disparate software packages.  There would still be too many packages with
> too much complexity, just different boundaries between packages.  I think an
> embedded sqllite system would improve complexity.
>
> I don't have a problem borrowing code from other packages, but I would
> suggest importing those packages into the Xastir code base and selectively
> updating them from the original.  I think this would cut down on a lot of
> thrashing due to extraneous code changes by other groups.
>
> What I'm hoping for is a single binary program image that can be
> distributed easily and run simply.  No complex installation with multiple
> packages to find, with the right versions, and install in the right order.
>  I would also like to see everything related to Xastir be installed in one
> directory tree and not splattered across the filesystem tree (user config
> files notwithstanding).  This would allow a common installation to be run on
> multiple machines from a network mounted filesystem.  And the installation
> or upgrade process could be as simple as copying the directory tree.
>
> Comments?   Flames?  Clues?
> Craig
>
> _______________________________________________
> Xastir mailing list
> Xastir at lists.xastir.org
> http://lists.xastir.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xastir
>