[Geoserver-devel] GSIP-136 Resource Notification Dispatcher

GeoServer GeoServer Developer
1

This is a follow up to pull request #1361 introducing some new public API:

https://github.com/geoserver/geoserver/wiki/GSIP-136

Niels I have changed your proposed interface a bit, to use paths rather than a resource when adding/removing listeners.

···

–
Jody Garnett

2

Looks good to me. I have updated the PR already to match the API change you made.

Kind Regards
Niels

On 07-01-16 03:46, Jody Garnett wrote:

This is a follow up to pull request #1361 <https://github.com/geoserver/geoserver/pull/1361&gt; introducing some new public API:

https://github.com/geoserver/geoserver/wiki/GSIP-136

Niels I have changed your proposed interface a bit, to use paths rather than a resource when adding/removing listeners.
--
Jody Garnett

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

_______________________________________________
Geoserver-devel mailing list
Geoserver-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel

3

I think I will need to update the default implementation as well. But thanks for the feedback.

On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 5:37 AM Niels Charlier <niels@anonymised.com> wrote:

Looks good to me. I have updated the PR already to match the API change you made.

Kind Regards
Niels

On 07-01-16 03:46, Jody Garnett wrote:

This is a follow up to pull request #1361 introducing some new public API:

https://github.com/geoserver/geoserver/wiki/GSIP-136

Niels I have changed your proposed interface a bit, to use paths rather than a resource when adding/removing listeners.

–
Jody Garnett

------------------------------------------------------------------------------


_______________________________________________
Geoserver-devel mailing list
[Geoserver-devel@lists.sourceforge.net](mailto:Geoserver-devel@lists.sourceforge.net)
[https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel](https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel)

Geoserver-devel mailing list
Geoserver-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel

–

–
Jody Garnett

4

+1. This is a backwards-compatible improvement to the ResourceStore API supported by experience gained in the JDBC resource store work. Niels and Jody have thrashed this one out quite thoroughly. Good work!

Kind regards,
Ben.

On 07/01/16 15:46, Jody Garnett wrote:

This is a follow up to pull request #1361
<https://github.com/geoserver/geoserver/pull/1361&gt; introducing some new
public API:

https://github.com/geoserver/geoserver/wiki/GSIP-136

Niels I have changed your proposed interface a bit, to use paths rather
than a resource when adding/removing listeners.
--
Jody Garnett

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

_______________________________________________
Geoserver-devel mailing list
Geoserver-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel

--
Ben Caradoc-Davies <ben@anonymised.com>
Director
Transient Software Limited <http://transient.nz/&gt;
New Zealand

5

Looks reasonable. +1

···

On 2016-01-06 06:46 PM, Jody Garnett wrote:

This is a follow up to pull request #1361 introducing some new public API:

https://github.com/geoserver/geoserver/wiki/GSIP-136

-- 
Kevin Michael Smith
[<smithkm@anonymised.com>](mailto:smithkm@anonymised.com)
6

Follow up to meeting “final call” for feedback:

https://github.com/geoserver/geoserver/wiki/GSIP-136

Project Steering Committee:

  • Alessio Fabiani

  • Andrea Aime

  • Ben Caradoc-Davies: +1

  • Christian Mueller

  • Ian Turton

  • Jody Garnett +1

  • Jukka Rahkonen

  • Kevin Smith: +1

  • Simone Giannecchini

Would like to move on, this is a small API change introducing a ResourceNotificationDispatcher along with add/remove listener methods being added to the core ResoruceStore API.

···

On 6 January 2016 at 18:46, Jody Garnett <jody.garnett@anonymised.com> wrote:

This is a follow up to pull request #1361 introducing some new public API:

https://github.com/geoserver/geoserver/wiki/GSIP-136

Niels I have changed your proposed interface a bit, to use paths rather than a resource when adding/removing listeners.

–
Jody Garnett

–
Jody Garnett

7

I’m 0 as I don’t have time to review this week.

Ian

···

–
Jody Garnett

On 6 January 2016 at 18:46, Jody Garnett <jody.garnett@anonymised.com> wrote:

This is a follow up to pull request #1361 introducing some new public API:

https://github.com/geoserver/geoserver/wiki/GSIP-136

Niels I have changed your proposed interface a bit, to use paths rather than a resource when adding/removing listeners.

–
Jody Garnett

8

+0

···

On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 8:30 AM, Ian Turton <ijturton@anonymised.com> wrote:

I’m 0 as I don’t have time to review this week.

Ian

On 13 Jan 2016 19:42, “Jody Garnett” <jody.garnett@anonymised.com> wrote:

Follow up to meeting “final call” for feedback:

https://github.com/geoserver/geoserver/wiki/GSIP-136

Project Steering Committee:

  • Alessio Fabiani

  • Andrea Aime

  • Ben Caradoc-Davies: +1

  • Christian Mueller

  • Ian Turton

  • Jody Garnett +1

  • Jukka Rahkonen

  • Kevin Smith: +1

  • Simone Giannecchini

Would like to move on, this is a small API change introducing a ResourceNotificationDispatcher along with add/remove listener methods being added to the core ResoruceStore API.

Site24x7 APM Insight: Get Deep Visibility into Application Performance
APM + Mobile APM + RUM: Monitor 3 App instances at just $35/Month
Monitor end-to-end web transactions and take corrective actions now
Troubleshoot faster and improve end-user experience. Signup Now!
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=267308311&iu=/4140

Geoserver-devel mailing list
Geoserver-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel

Site24x7 APM Insight: Get Deep Visibility into Application Performance
APM + Mobile APM + RUM: Monitor 3 App instances at just $35/Month
Monitor end-to-end web transactions and take corrective actions now
Troubleshoot faster and improve end-user experience. Signup Now!
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=267308311&iu=/4140

Geoserver-devel mailing list
Geoserver-devel@anonymised.comsts.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel

==
GeoServer Professional Services from the experts! Visit
http://goo.gl/NWWaa2 for more information.

Ing. Alessio Fabiani
@alfa7691
Founder/Technical Lead

GeoSolutions S.A.S.
Via Poggio alle Viti 1187
55054 Massarosa (LU)
Italy
phone: +39 0584 962313
fax: +39 0584 1660272
mob: +39 331 6233686

http://www.geo-solutions.it
http://twitter.com/geosolutions_it

AVVERTENZE AI SENSI DEL D.Lgs. 196/2003

Le informazioni contenute in questo messaggio di posta elettronica e/o nel/i file/s allegato/i sono da considerarsi strettamente riservate. Il loro utilizzo è consentito esclusivamente al destinatario del messaggio, per le finalità indicate nel messaggio stesso. Qualora riceviate questo messaggio senza esserne il destinatario, Vi preghiamo cortesemente di darcene notizia via e-mail e di procedere alla distruzione del messaggio stesso, cancellandolo dal Vostro sistema. Conservare il messaggio stesso, divulgarlo anche in parte, distribuirlo ad altri soggetti, copiarlo, od utilizzarlo per finalità diverse, costituisce comportamento contrario ai principi dettati dal D.Lgs. 196/2003.

The information in this message and/or attachments, is intended solely for the attention and use of the named addressee(s) and may be confidential or proprietary in nature or covered by the provisions of privacy act (Legislative Decree June, 30 2003, no.196 - Italy’s New Data Protection Code).Any use not in accord with its purpose, any disclosure, reproduction, copying, distribution, or either dissemination, either whole or partial, is strictly forbidden except previous formal approval of the named addressee(s). If you are not the intended recipient, please contact immediately the sender by telephone, fax or e-mail and delete the information in this message that has been received in error. The sender does not give any warranty or accept liability as the content, accuracy or completeness of sent messages and accepts no responsibility for changes made after they were sent or for other risks which arise as a result of e-mail transmission, viruses, etc.

–
Jody Garnett

On 6 January 2016 at 18:46, Jody Garnett <jody.garnett@anonymised.com> wrote:

This is a follow up to pull request #1361 introducing some new public API:

https://github.com/geoserver/geoserver/wiki/GSIP-136

Niels I have changed your proposed interface a bit, to use paths rather than a resource when adding/removing listeners.

–
Jody Garnett

9

On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 8:30 AM, Ian Turton <ijturton@anonymised.com> wrote:

I'm 0 as I don't have time to review this week.

Likewise

Cheers
Andrea

--

GeoServer Professional Services from the experts! Visit
http://goo.gl/it488V for more information.

Ing. Andrea Aime
@geowolf
Technical Lead

GeoSolutions S.A.S.
Via Poggio alle Viti 1187
55054 Massarosa (LU)
Italy
phone: +39 0584 962313
fax: +39 0584 1660272
mob: +39 339 8844549

http://www.geo-solutions.it
http://twitter.com/geosolutions_it

*AVVERTENZE AI SENSI DEL D.Lgs. 196/2003*

Le informazioni contenute in questo messaggio di posta elettronica e/o
nel/i file/s allegato/i sono da considerarsi strettamente riservate. Il
loro utilizzo è consentito esclusivamente al destinatario del messaggio,
per le finalità indicate nel messaggio stesso. Qualora riceviate questo
messaggio senza esserne il destinatario, Vi preghiamo cortesemente di
darcene notizia via e-mail e di procedere alla distruzione del messaggio
stesso, cancellandolo dal Vostro sistema. Conservare il messaggio stesso,
divulgarlo anche in parte, distribuirlo ad altri soggetti, copiarlo, od
utilizzarlo per finalità diverse, costituisce comportamento contrario ai
principi dettati dal D.Lgs. 196/2003.

The information in this message and/or attachments, is intended solely for
the attention and use of the named addressee(s) and may be confidential or
proprietary in nature or covered by the provisions of privacy act
(Legislative Decree June, 30 2003, no.196 - Italy's New Data Protection
Code).Any use not in accord with its purpose, any disclosure, reproduction,
copying, distribution, or either dissemination, either whole or partial, is
strictly forbidden except previous formal approval of the named
addressee(s). If you are not the intended recipient, please contact
immediately the sender by telephone, fax or e-mail and delete the
information in this message that has been received in error. The sender
does not give any warranty or accept liability as the content, accuracy or
completeness of sent messages and accepts no responsibility for changes
made after they were sent or for other risks which arise as a result of
e-mail transmission, viruses, etc.

-------------------------------------------------------

10

0

No time to review

Christian

···

On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 10:32 AM, Andrea Aime <andrea.aime@…1268…> wrote:

Site24x7 APM Insight: Get Deep Visibility into Application Performance
APM + Mobile APM + RUM: Monitor 3 App instances at just $35/Month
Monitor end-to-end web transactions and take corrective actions now
Troubleshoot faster and improve end-user experience. Signup Now!
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=267308311&iu=/4140

Geoserver-devel mailing list
Geoserver-devel@anonymised.comsts.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel

–

On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 8:30 AM, Ian Turton <ijturton@anonymised.com> wrote:

I’m 0 as I don’t have time to review this week.

Likewise

Cheers
Andrea

–

==
GeoServer Professional Services from the experts! Visit

http://goo.gl/it488V for more information.

Ing. Andrea Aime

@geowolf

Technical Lead

GeoSolutions S.A.S.
Via Poggio alle Viti 1187
55054 Massarosa (LU)
Italy
phone: +39 0584 962313
fax: +39 0584 1660272

mob: +39 339 8844549

http://www.geo-solutions.it
http://twitter.com/geosolutions_it

AVVERTENZE AI SENSI DEL D.Lgs. 196/2003

Le informazioni contenute in questo messaggio di posta elettronica e/o nel/i file/s allegato/i sono da considerarsi strettamente riservate. Il loro utilizzo è consentito esclusivamente al destinatario del messaggio, per le finalità indicate nel messaggio stesso. Qualora riceviate questo messaggio senza esserne il destinatario, Vi preghiamo cortesemente di darcene notizia via e-mail e di procedere alla distruzione del messaggio stesso, cancellandolo dal Vostro sistema. Conservare il messaggio stesso, divulgarlo anche in parte, distribuirlo ad altri soggetti, copiarlo, od utilizzarlo per finalità diverse, costituisce comportamento contrario ai principi dettati dal D.Lgs. 196/2003.

The information in this message and/or attachments, is intended solely for the attention and use of the named addressee(s) and may be confidential or proprietary in nature or covered by the provisions of privacy act (Legislative Decree June, 30 2003, no.196 - Italy’s New Data Protection Code).Any use not in accord with its purpose, any disclosure, reproduction, copying, distribution, or either dissemination, either whole or partial, is strictly forbidden except previous formal approval of the named addressee(s). If you are not the intended recipient, please contact immediately the sender by telephone, fax or e-mail and delete the information in this message that has been received in error. The sender does not give any warranty or accept liability as the content, accuracy or completeness of sent messages and accepts no responsibility for changes made after they were sent or for other risks which arise as a result of e-mail transmission, viruses, etc.

DI Christian Mueller MSc (GIS), MSc (IT-Security)
OSS Open Source Solutions GmbH

11

Jody,

GSIP-136 now has 4 "+1" votes and 5 "0" votes, so according to the GSIP procedure, has been rejected: "The proposal is considered successful after a majority of positive votes is a achieved".

Kind regards,
Ben.

On 14/01/16 08:40, Jody Garnett wrote:

https://github.com/geoserver/geoserver/wiki/GSIP-136

--
Ben Caradoc-Davies <ben@anonymised.com>
Director
Transient Software Limited <http://transient.nz/&gt;
New Zealand

12

I consider that +0 votes are positive.

-Jukka-

-----Alkuperäinen viesti-----
Lähettäjä: Ben Caradoc-Davies [mailto:ben@anonymised.com]
Lähetetty: 14. tammikuuta 2016 23:08
Vastaanottaja: Jody Garnett; Geoserver Developers
Aihe: Re: [Geoserver-devel] GSIP-136 Resource Notification Dispatcher

Jody,

GSIP-136 now has 4 "+1" votes and 5 "0" votes, so according to the GSIP procedure, has been rejected: "The proposal is considered successful after a majority of positive votes is a achieved".

Kind regards,
Ben.

On 14/01/16 08:40, Jody Garnett wrote:

https://github.com/geoserver/geoserver/wiki/GSIP-136

--
Ben Caradoc-Davies <ben@anonymised.com>
Director
Transient Software Limited <http://transient.nz/&gt; New Zealand

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Site24x7 APM Insight: Get Deep Visibility into Application Performance APM + Mobile APM + RUM: Monitor 3 App instances at just $35/Month Monitor end-to-end web transactions and take corrective actions now Troubleshoot faster and improve end-user experience. Signup Now!
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=267308311&iu=/4140
_______________________________________________
Geoserver-devel mailing list
Geoserver-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel

13

I am curious about this:
+1 = Positive (we should do this)
+0 = Abstains (won't/can't vote one way or another, possibly due to lack of information or time to study the proposal)
-1 = Negative (we should NOT do this)

This kind of the thoughts for the various votes?

Chris Snider
Senior Software Engineer
Intelligent Software Solutions, Inc.

-----Original Message-----
From: Rahkonen Jukka (MML) [mailto:jukka.rahkonen@anonymised.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 14, 2016 2:31 PM
To: Ben Caradoc-Davies <ben@anonymised.com>; Jody Garnett <jody.garnett@anonymised.com..>; Geoserver Developers <geoserver-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Geoserver-devel] GSIP-136 Resource Notification Dispatcher

I consider that +0 votes are positive.

-Jukka-

-----Alkuperäinen viesti-----
Lähettäjä: Ben Caradoc-Davies [mailto:ben@anonymised.com]
Lähetetty: 14. tammikuuta 2016 23:08
Vastaanottaja: Jody Garnett; Geoserver Developers
Aihe: Re: [Geoserver-devel] GSIP-136 Resource Notification Dispatcher

Jody,

GSIP-136 now has 4 "+1" votes and 5 "0" votes, so according to the GSIP procedure, has been rejected: "The proposal is considered successful after a majority of positive votes is a achieved".

Kind regards,
Ben.

On 14/01/16 08:40, Jody Garnett wrote:

https://github.com/geoserver/geoserver/wiki/GSIP-136

--
Ben Caradoc-Davies <ben@anonymised.com>
Director
Transient Software Limited <http://transient.nz/&gt; New Zealand

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Site24x7 APM Insight: Get Deep Visibility into Application Performance APM + Mobile APM + RUM: Monitor 3 App instances at just $35/Month Monitor end-to-end web transactions and take corrective actions now Troubleshoot faster and improve end-user experience. Signup Now!
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=267308311&iu=/4140
_______________________________________________
Geoserver-devel mailing list
Geoserver-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Site24x7 APM Insight: Get Deep Visibility into Application Performance
APM + Mobile APM + RUM: Monitor 3 App instances at just $35/Month
Monitor end-to-end web transactions and take corrective actions now
Troubleshoot faster and improve end-user experience. Signup Now!
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=267308311&iu=/4140
_______________________________________________
Geoserver-devel mailing list
Geoserver-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel

14

Jukka,

there is different language on the PSC page (+0/-0) and on the GSIP page (only 0):
http://docs.geoserver.org/latest/en/developer/policies/gsip.html
http://docs.geoserver.org/latest/en/developer/policies/psc.html

I think these two pages need clarification and synchronisation.

Furthermore, many voters did not indicate the sign of their zero. Do we take a plain 0 as positive for GSIP purposes? If so, then any vote is either a "for" vote or a veto, which makes no sense to me as there is never a need for a majority.

In my view, +0/0/-0 count the same for voting (as in IEEE 754), with sign being an indication of sentiment only. Votes of +0/0/-0 count for determining majority. For a GSIP to be successful, it must have a majority of +1 votes (a simple majority, those who do not vote are not counted, but we should be explicit about this in the procedure), and no -1 votes.

I would welcome a review and clarification of our voting procedures.

I would also welcome more +1 votes for GSIP-136.

Kind regards,
Ben.

On 15/01/16 10:30, Rahkonen Jukka (MML) wrote:

I consider that +0 votes are positive.

-Jukka-

-----Alkuperäinen viesti-----
Lähettäjä: Ben Caradoc-Davies [mailto:ben@anonymised.com]
Lähetetty: 14. tammikuuta 2016 23:08
Vastaanottaja: Jody Garnett; Geoserver Developers
Aihe: Re: [Geoserver-devel] GSIP-136 Resource Notification Dispatcher

Jody,

GSIP-136 now has 4 "+1" votes and 5 "0" votes, so according to the GSIP procedure, has been rejected: "The proposal is considered successful after a majority of positive votes is a achieved".

Kind regards,
Ben.

On 14/01/16 08:40, Jody Garnett wrote:

https://github.com/geoserver/geoserver/wiki/GSIP-136

--
Ben Caradoc-Davies <ben@anonymised.com>
Director
Transient Software Limited <http://transient.nz/&gt; New Zealand

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Site24x7 APM Insight: Get Deep Visibility into Application Performance APM + Mobile APM + RUM: Monitor 3 App instances at just $35/Month Monitor end-to-end web transactions and take corrective actions now Troubleshoot faster and improve end-user experience. Signup Now!
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=267308311&iu=/4140
_______________________________________________
Geoserver-devel mailing list
Geoserver-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel

--
Ben Caradoc-Davies <ben@anonymised.com>
Director
Transient Software Limited <http://transient.nz/&gt;
New Zealand

15

Chris,

the PSC page (which differs from the GSIP page) lists:
http://docs.geoserver.org/latest/en/developer/policies/psc.html

     +1 : For
     -1 : Against
     +0: Mildly for, but mostly indifferent
     -0: Mildly against, but mostly indifferent

What is unclear is whether +0 is considered positive. The GSIP procedure mentions only 0 so there is no ambiguity:
http://docs.geoserver.org/latest/en/developer/policies/gsip.html

Kind regards,
Ben.

On 15/01/16 10:59, Chris Snider wrote:

I am curious about this:
+1 = Positive (we should do this)
+0 = Abstains (won't/can't vote one way or another, possibly due to lack of information or time to study the proposal)
-1 = Negative (we should NOT do this)

This kind of the thoughts for the various votes?

Chris Snider
Senior Software Engineer
Intelligent Software Solutions, Inc.

--
Ben Caradoc-Davies <ben@anonymised.com>
Director
Transient Software Limited <http://transient.nz/&gt;
New Zealand

16

HI Chris,
the -1 has an extra requirement, one has to propose an alternative plan (whenever possible).
In other terms, -1 has to be expressed in constructive terms, or it’s not valid

Cheers
Andrea

···

On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 10:59 PM, Chris Snider <chris.snider@anonymised.com> wrote:

I am curious about this:
+1 = Positive (we should do this)
+0 = Abstains (won’t/can’t vote one way or another, possibly due to lack of information or time to study the proposal)
-1 = Negative (we should NOT do this)

This kind of the thoughts for the various votes?

Chris Snider
Senior Software Engineer
Intelligent Software Solutions, Inc.

-----Original Message-----
From: Rahkonen Jukka (MML) [mailto:jukka.rahkonen@anonymised.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 14, 2016 2:31 PM
To: Ben Caradoc-Davies <ben@anonymised.com>; Jody Garnett <jody.garnett@anonymised.com>; Geoserver Developers <geoserver-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Geoserver-devel] GSIP-136 Resource Notification Dispatcher

I consider that +0 votes are positive.

-Jukka-

-----Alkuperäinen viesti-----
Lähettäjä: Ben Caradoc-Davies [mailto:ben@anonymised.com]
Lähetetty: 14. tammikuuta 2016 23:08
Vastaanottaja: Jody Garnett; Geoserver Developers
Aihe: Re: [Geoserver-devel] GSIP-136 Resource Notification Dispatcher

Jody,

GSIP-136 now has 4 “+1” votes and 5 “0” votes, so according to the GSIP procedure, has been rejected: “The proposal is considered successful after a majority of positive votes is a achieved”.

Kind regards,
Ben.

On 14/01/16 08:40, Jody Garnett wrote:

https://github.com/geoserver/geoserver/wiki/GSIP-136

–
Ben Caradoc-Davies <ben@anonymised.com>
Director
Transient Software Limited <http://transient.nz/> New Zealand

Site24x7 APM Insight: Get Deep Visibility into Application Performance APM + Mobile APM + RUM: Monitor 3 App instances at just $35/Month Monitor end-to-end web transactions and take corrective actions now Troubleshoot faster and improve end-user experience. Signup Now!
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=267308311&iu=/4140

Geoserver-devel mailing list
Geoserver-devel@anonymised.comsts.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel

Site24x7 APM Insight: Get Deep Visibility into Application Performance
APM + Mobile APM + RUM: Monitor 3 App instances at just $35/Month
Monitor end-to-end web transactions and take corrective actions now
Troubleshoot faster and improve end-user experience. Signup Now!
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=267308311&iu=/4140

Geoserver-devel mailing list
Geoserver-devel@anonymised.comsts.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel

Site24x7 APM Insight: Get Deep Visibility into Application Performance
APM + Mobile APM + RUM: Monitor 3 App instances at just $35/Month
Monitor end-to-end web transactions and take corrective actions now
Troubleshoot faster and improve end-user experience. Signup Now!
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=267308311&iu=/4140

Geoserver-devel mailing list
Geoserver-devel@anonymised.comsts.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel

–

==
GeoServer Professional Services from the experts! Visit
http://goo.gl/it488V for more information.

Ing. Andrea Aime

@geowolf
Technical Lead

GeoSolutions S.A.S.
Via Poggio alle Viti 1187
55054 Massarosa (LU)
Italy
phone: +39 0584 962313
fax: +39 0584 1660272
mob: +39 339 8844549

http://www.geo-solutions.it
http://twitter.com/geosolutions_it

AVVERTENZE AI SENSI DEL D.Lgs. 196/2003

Le informazioni contenute in questo messaggio di posta elettronica e/o nel/i file/s allegato/i sono da considerarsi strettamente riservate. Il loro utilizzo è consentito esclusivamente al destinatario del messaggio, per le finalità indicate nel messaggio stesso. Qualora riceviate questo messaggio senza esserne il destinatario, Vi preghiamo cortesemente di darcene notizia via e-mail e di procedere alla distruzione del messaggio stesso, cancellandolo dal Vostro sistema. Conservare il messaggio stesso, divulgarlo anche in parte, distribuirlo ad altri soggetti, copiarlo, od utilizzarlo per finalità diverse, costituisce comportamento contrario ai principi dettati dal D.Lgs. 196/2003.

The information in this message and/or attachments, is intended solely for the attention and use of the named addressee(s) and may be confidential or proprietary in nature or covered by the provisions of privacy act (Legislative Decree June, 30 2003, no.196 - Italy’s New Data Protection Code).Any use not in accord with its purpose, any disclosure, reproduction, copying, distribution, or either dissemination, either whole or partial, is strictly forbidden except previous formal approval of the named addressee(s). If you are not the intended recipient, please contact immediately the sender by telephone, fax or e-mail and delete the information in this message that has been received in error. The sender does not give any warranty or accept liability as the content, accuracy or completeness of sent messages and accepts no responsibility for changes made after they were sent or for other risks which arise as a result of e-mail transmission, viruses, etc.

17

I do not want to get too hung up on words, the quick take is the PSC does not have enough capacity to review the proposal at the moment so we should wait. The GeoServer process does not have a time limit like the GeoTools one.

I like +0 and -0 as that provides a way for people who have not had time to provide their “rough feeling” about the topic.

···

On 14 January 2016 at 14:05, Ben Caradoc-Davies <ben@anonymised.com> wrote:

Chris,

the PSC page (which differs from the GSIP page) lists:
http://docs.geoserver.org/latest/en/developer/policies/psc.html

+1 : For
-1 : Against
+0: Mildly for, but mostly indifferent
-0: Mildly against, but mostly indifferent

What is unclear is whether +0 is considered positive. The GSIP procedure mentions only 0 so there is no ambiguity:
http://docs.geoserver.org/latest/en/developer/policies/gsip.html

Kind regards,
Ben.

On 15/01/16 10:59, Chris Snider wrote:

I am curious about this:
+1 = Positive (we should do this)
+0 = Abstains (won’t/can’t vote one way or another, possibly due to lack of information or time to study the proposal)
-1 = Negative (we should NOT do this)

This kind of the thoughts for the various votes?

Chris Snider
Senior Software Engineer
Intelligent Software Solutions, Inc.

–
Ben Caradoc-Davies <ben@anonymised.com>
Director
Transient Software Limited <http://transient.nz/>
New Zealand

–
Jody Garnett

18

Jody,

I also like +0/-0, but I think that these votes should be counted as the same.

As the PSC has grown (in terms of active members), was it our intent that we need more +1 votes to accept a GSIP to reach a majority? One consequence is that this GSIP was in effect rejected by the 0 votes of voting members who did not oppose the proposal, diluting the majority that the GSIP had achieved before Jody encouraged PSC members to vote (which was a good thing in itself). If these 0-voting PSC members had ignored the vote, the GSIP would have been accepted. This GSIP was rejected by diligent conformance to process.

We might consider changing the process success to define success by (for example) three +1 votes and no -1 votes, like the rules for GeoTools commit access (but with only PSC members voting).

Should change require support from a minimum number of PSC members, or should change as is now the case require active support from a (simple) majority of the PSC?

Kind regards,
Ben.

On 16/01/16 06:02, Jody Garnett wrote:

I do not want to get too hung up on words, the quick take is the PSC does
not have enough capacity to review the proposal at the moment so we should
wait. The GeoServer process does not have a time limit like the GeoTools
one.

I like +0 and -0 as that provides a way for people who have not had time to
provide their "rough feeling" about the topic.

--
Ben Caradoc-Davies <ben@anonymised.com>
Director
Transient Software Limited <http://transient.nz/&gt;
New Zealand

19

This is a bit awkward as process is rejecting the proposal due to lack of participation, leaving a rejected proposal and no clear way forward. We could take that the proposal was not sufficiently clear (ie quick to read) and revise and submit again … but I am really not interested in running around in circles, or revising our process beyond making it consistent, at this time.

The GeoTools process has a 15 day time limit to prevent deadlock due to “lack of interest/time” from the community - thus far we have not needed this kind of thing for GeoServer.

… thinking …

I have updated the proposal: https://github.com/geoserver/geoserver/wiki/GSIP-136 including the following single sentence overview:

Create an ResourceNotificationDispatcher API, to inject into the ResourceStore implementation allowing dispatch of event notification to be handled differently for a clustered environment.

I also note that Simone has not responded yet, if he votes +1 Ben will get his 50% :slight_smile: I have also documented the alternative proposed in email, it can work as a fallback plan for Niels that does not require an API change.

···

On 15 January 2016 at 11:51, Ben Caradoc-Davies <ben@anonymised.com> wrote:

Jody,

I also like +0/-0, but I think that these votes should be counted as the same.

As the PSC has grown (in terms of active members), was it our intent that we need more +1 votes to accept a GSIP to reach a majority? One consequence is that this GSIP was in effect rejected by the 0 votes of voting members who did not oppose the proposal, diluting the majority that the GSIP had achieved before Jody encouraged PSC members to vote (which was a good thing in itself). If these 0-voting PSC members had ignored the vote, the GSIP would have been accepted. This GSIP was rejected by diligent conformance to process.

We might consider changing the process success to define success by (for example) three +1 votes and no -1 votes, like the rules for GeoTools commit access (but with only PSC members voting).

Should change require support from a minimum number of PSC members, or should change as is now the case require active support from a (simple) majority of the PSC?

Kind regards,
Ben.

On 16/01/16 06:02, Jody Garnett wrote:

I do not want to get too hung up on words, the quick take is the PSC does
not have enough capacity to review the proposal at the moment so we should
wait. The GeoServer process does not have a time limit like the GeoTools
one.

I like +0 and -0 as that provides a way for people who have not had time to
provide their “rough feeling” about the topic.

–

Ben Caradoc-Davies <ben@anonymised.com>
Director
Transient Software Limited <http://transient.nz/>
New Zealand

–
Jody Garnett

20

50% is not a majority.

Several PSC members requested more time, so perhaps voting should be deferred for a week or so? If one 0-voter changes their vote to +1, the GSIP is successful.

On 16/01/16 10:26, Jody Garnett wrote:

I also note that Simone has not responded yet, if he votes +1 Ben will get
his 50% :slight_smile:

--
Ben Caradoc-Davies <ben@anonymised.com>
Director
Transient Software Limited <http://transient.nz/&gt;
New Zealand