[Geoserver-devel] GeoTools / GeoServer PMC meeting - 2019-12-10

### Attending

Torben Barsballe

Kevin Smith

Andrea Aime

Jody Garnett

Jukka Rahkonen

Actions from last meeting- Jody: Motion to accept CITE Proposal [DONE]

Agenda- QA Chatter

  • January Releases (2.16.2 and 2.17-RC)

  • Relax CLA requirements

  • GSIP 184 MBStyle

  • GSIP 185 Web-resource

  • GSIP-183 WFS Stored Queries

  • GWC not to break seeds at the first error

Actions- Jody: Ask on user/devel Should we move Import Data to the tools page?

  • Jody: Ask on user list for someone to test windows URL validity [DONE]

  • Torben: Remove ImageMosaic test workarounds for Mac

  • Andrea: Updated release schedule - 2.17.0 in march [DONE]

  • Jody: Propose GSIP 184 to list

  • All: Vote on GSIP 185

  • Fernando Miño: Start email thread for voting on GSIP 183

QA Chatter

OS X Build for PRs?

Tools page broken

  • web-demo CommonFormatLink extends ToolLinkExternalInfo

  • Tools page publishes all ToolLinkExternalInfo, but fails for these CommonFormatLink subclasses (which do not provide a description)

  • Quick workaround is to ignore the ones without a description

  • Review of:

  • https://github.com/geoserver/geoserver/tree/master/src/web/demo

  • SRS List → Tools

  • Reproject Console → Tools

  • Demo Request → Demo

  • WPS Request builder → Demo

  • WCS Request builder → Demo

  • Map Preview → leave that alone :slight_smile:

  • Long term we should refactor these classes - any suggestions?

  • If we do this hide the developer debugging tools :slight_smile:

  • CommonFormatLink → extending the wrong base class

  • Deprecate ToolLinkExternalInfo

  • Discussion:

  • Q: Should we move Import Data to the tools page? Asks page …

Windows build URL Validity regression: https://github.com/geotools/geotools/pull/2713

  • We need to comment this out, Gabriel tried to do something platform specific but it did not work

  • Would allow to use GitHub PR Windows builds: https://github.com/geotools/geotools/pull/2725

  • Action: Ask on user list for someone to test

Polygon Fill offset?

  • Required for QGIS …

  • Consider making a 2x2 image, and then extracting

January Releases (2.16.2 and 2.17-RC)

2.16.2 tentatively fielded by GeoSolutions

  • thanks!

Q: When is the 2.17.0 release? February or March?

  • Historically March? Still a good idea …

  • February 2.17-RC

  • March 2.17.0

  • Do we want to move one month earlier to align with FOSS4G schedule?

  • Nobody available because summer …

  • On the bright side the code base is stable

Action:

Relax CLA requirements

Discussion:

  • Right now we ask for CLA, for anything but trivial changes, …

  • Word on the street is to stop using CLA all together … https://opensource.com/article/19/2/cla-problems

  • We actually make use of CLA:

  • To relicense code and donate to GeoTools, JTS, GeoWebCache :slight_smile:

License:

Context:

The issue:

  1. We value having a CLA so we can relicense code and make donations to other projects

  2. It also confirms person had permission to make functionality open source

  3. Some protection around patents and trademarks

  4. We have some GPL code in the wild we would like to build on, but we would have no ability to relicense

Idea:

  • Allow GPL’d code without a CLA to be merge into the codebase

  • Mark the module as “Strictly GPL”

  • No code from that module can be moved into core or another extension (it would make them tainted too)

  • Same for GeoTools, using LGPL licence.

Danger:

  • More folks would like to avoid CLA if we have a mechanism to support

  • Limit mechanism to single modules, no intermingling

GSIP 184 MBStyle

Action:

  • Jody share with email list

  • Jody needs to propose to GeoTools list also

GSIP-185 web-resource

All discussion from email is included.

Action:

  • Proposal lists the work that is needed, proposal voting can happen now

GSIP-183 WFS Stored Queries

This has been merged, we should vote on it to see if any additional work is needed.

Action:

  • Fernando Miño to start email thread for voting

GWC not to break seeds at the first error

Tile seeding threads die and do not say why ….

  • Error tolerating is present, but only turned on via system variable

  • Shows up as “why did seeding not finish”!

Approach: https://github.com/GeoWebCache/geowebcache/pull/810

  • Change to GWC to expose these tolerance in user interface

Aside:

  • Also note that the totals do not take the number of threads into account (so 5 days with 5 threads should be 1 day).

Action:

  • Jody has approved, merge when ready Andrea

Some further thoughts:

Relax CLA requirements

Discussion:

  • Right now we ask for CLA, for anything but trivial changes, …

  • Word on the street is to stop using CLA all together … https://opensource.com/article/19/2/cla-problems

  • We actually make use of CLA:

  • To relicense code and donate to GeoTools, JTS, GeoWebCache :slight_smile:

License:

Context:

The issue:

  1. We value having a CLA so we can relicense code and make donations to other projects

  2. It also confirms person had permission to make functionality open source

  3. Some protection around patents and trademarks

  4. We have some GPL code in the wild we would like to build on, but we would have no ability to relicense

Idea:

  • Allow GPL’d code without a CLA to be merge into the codebase

  • Mark the module as “Strictly GPL”

  • No code from that module can be moved into core or another extension (it would make them tainted too)

  • Same for GeoTools, using LGPL licence.

Danger:

  • More folks would like to avoid CLA if we have a mechanism to support

  • Limit mechanism to single modules, no intermingling

Just on “how to do it” clearly front:

  1. Maintain original GPL header
  2. Add our own header (if we make changes beyond repackaging)

This is the same process used for other code reuse, and should be fairly clear. It also has the advantage of being visible on a file by file basis.
This does not take away from documenting in module README, we can also consider an explicit LICENSE file for these modules.

One thing we cannot necessarily fix is granting the additional clause used in the GeoServer license (although for any modules such as GSR based on GeoServer already need to account for this).

Jody