I took a run through the GSIP pages listed as under discussion ... I have missed a few geoserver meetings and wanted to catch up.
http://geoserver.org/display/GEOS/GSIP+12+-+Mock+Test+Support
- proposal seems incomplete?
- I actually thought some of this work was done?
- While it is important and effects our coding policies as developers it will not effect the shipped product to any great extent; does this need to be a GSIP?
http://geoserver.org/display/GEOS/GSIP+21+-+KML+Vector+Transformer+Refactoring
- this appears to be a maintenance task based on the title (if so refactoring would be responsible development?)
- on reading it appears to be defining a new module with extensions and so forth; a nice bit of work
- I would stress the need for developer documentation; but the proposal seems solid
- no indication that this needs voting yet
my feedback is that I try to filter out actual voting requirements and act, and look at proposals within my area of competence and interest, but its very hard to follow the actual process.
Can we use JIRA perhaps to register the GSIP, so that PSC members are automatically added as watchers, and the proposal owner can then easily drop a comment in to remind people of voting requirements.
Either that, or create a special mailing list or tag line so we can filter out an promote GSIP review & voting processes?
While it is important and effects our coding policies as developers it
will not effect the shipped product to any great extent; does this need
to be a GSIP?
not even sure if the time elevation band functionality works after the
proposal or if this is just setup? It is just listed in the title; not
in the tasks
voting has not started
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer’s challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
My feedback is that I try to filter out actual voting requirements and act, and look at proposals within my area of competence and interest, but its very hard to follow the actual process.
Well that will be something to work on then; perhaps we need a separate list of proposals that are ready for review; going to make sure it is not already sitting in front of me....
Nope I do see a list of active proposal; including the wicket UI - which I understand is on hold (or at least moving slowly while GeoServer 1.7 is move out of the way?).
Can we use JIRA perhaps to register the GSIP, so that PSC members are automatically added as watchers, and the proposal owner can then easily drop a comment in to remind people of voting requirements.
A good idea; I think we have held off creating a JIRA until the item is approved; I only see Jira tasks listed against active proposals right now.
Either that, or create a special mailing list or tag line so we can filter out an promote GSIP review & voting processes?
Well as it is the developer list + wiki is expected to be sufficient; The initial batch of GSIP emails were always tagged with "GSIP*" so you should be okay.
I am just trying to make sure that we are not operating on an unwritten rule of random IRC chat + Weekly meeting. By the same token the kind of problems that can be addressed by random IRC chat + weekly meeting are I hope not in scope for GSIP proposals; there should be no conflict.
I took a run through the GSIP pages listed as under discussion ... I have missed a few geoserver meetings and wanted to catch up.
http://geoserver.org/display/GEOS/GSIP+12+-+Mock+Test+Support
- proposal seems incomplete?
- I actually thought some of this work was done?
- While it is important and effects our coding policies as developers it will not effect the shipped product to any great extent; does this need to be a GSIP?
This has actually been implemented ages ago, before 1.6.0 got released,
and it's the testing framework we're using today. The GSIP should be
cancelled thought, it does not describe what we do have today.
These were in the making but they seem to be stalled. When a proposal
is in the conception state should probably avoid giving them numbers and keep them in a separate area until they are ready to be discussed and voted. Like putting them in R&D or having a "proposal shipyard" area.
On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 10:55 AM, Andrea Aime <aaime@anonymised.com> wrote:
Jody Garnett ha scritto:
I took a run through the GSIP pages listed as under discussion ... I
have missed a few geoserver meetings and wanted to catch up.
http://geoserver.org/display/GEOS/GSIP+12+-+Mock+Test+Support
- proposal seems incomplete?
- I actually thought some of this work was done?
- While it is important and effects our coding policies as developers it
will not effect the shipped product to any great extent; does this need
to be a GSIP?
This has actually been implemented ages ago, before 1.6.0 got released,
and it's the testing framework we're using today. The GSIP should be
cancelled thought, it does not describe what we do have today.
These were in the making but they seem to be stalled. When a proposal
is in the conception state should probably avoid giving them numbers and
keep them in a separate area until they are ready to be discussed and
voted. Like putting them in R&D or having a "proposal shipyard" area.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
_______________________________________________
Geoserver-devel mailing list
Geoserver-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel
+1 on GSIP 20 as well. I also like the idea of not giving a GSIP a number until it is actually active.
Andrea Aime wrote:
Jody Garnett ha scritto:
I took a run through the GSIP pages listed as under discussion ... I have missed a few geoserver meetings and wanted to catch up.
http://geoserver.org/display/GEOS/GSIP+12+-+Mock+Test+Support
- proposal seems incomplete?
- I actually thought some of this work was done?
- While it is important and effects our coding policies as developers it will not effect the shipped product to any great extent; does this need to be a GSIP?
This has actually been implemented ages ago, before 1.6.0 got released,
and it's the testing framework we're using today. The GSIP should be
cancelled thought, it does not describe what we do have today.
These were in the making but they seem to be stalled. When a proposal
is in the conception state should probably avoid giving them numbers and keep them in a separate area until they are ready to be discussed and voted. Like putting them in R&D or having a "proposal shipyard" area.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
_______________________________________________
Geoserver-devel mailing list
Geoserver-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel
!DSPAM:4007,487db79e110495332866982!
--
Justin Deoliveira
The Open Planning Project
jdeolive@anonymised.com
- proposal is better than last time I reviewed; no indication that voting is started
David should take care of pushing for a vote. For what it's worth, here is my +1
David can you update the GSIP page as these votes come in? We are supposed to link to the several amusing email discussions on this topic as well.
I am happy with the proposal; it even mentions what documentation page should be updated
I am going check we a co-worker who is working on KML and make sure they are happy with the proposal (they may be able to catch some details I have missed).
I will read the IRC meeting and see if I can answer some of my questions; am I correct in thinking this "update" adds no user visible functionality? I am happy with the work; bringing more of our code under the new dispatcher is a good thing.
+1
- seems to be a refresh of the WCS cod
- not even sure if the time elevation band functionality works after the proposal or if this is just setup? It is just listed in the title; not in the tasks
- voting has not started
Seems all good on this end;
+1
There was some enthusiasm for cleaning up the code.
Jody
Jody Garnett wrote:
David can you update the GSIP page as these votes come in? We are supposed to link to the several amusing email discussions on this topic as well.
I am happy with the proposal; it even mentions what documentation page should be updated
I am going check we a co-worker who is working on KML and make sure they are happy with the proposal (they may be able to catch some details I have missed).
Jody
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
_______________________________________________
Geoserver-devel mailing list
Geoserver-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel
Seems all good on this end;
+1
There was some enthusiasm for cleaning up the code.
Jody
Jody Garnett wrote:
David can you update the GSIP page as these votes come in? We are
supposed to link to the several amusing email discussions on this topic
as well.
I am happy with the proposal; it even mentions what documentation page
should be updated
I am going check we a co-worker who is working on KML and make sure they
are happy with the proposal (they may be able to catch some details I
have missed).
Jody
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer’s challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer’s challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
Ok, so we have a good agreement. Unfortunately this GSIP is not
going to be turned into actual code unless there is someone
willing to work on it.
David created it as a response for a suggestion of mine to
refactor the KML code, since it's getting a little out of
control. But the GSIP was meant more as a place where to dump
ideas on how to do the refactoring as opposed to as a request
to do those changes.
We should create a section of "good ideas in need of resources"
or "good idea in the making",
potential GSIP that are well thought out but do lack resources,
or potential ones that still need some crafting,
and move this and other GSIP there.
David, Justin, you own most of those GSIP's, care to create
that section, move the GSIP there, and take the number away
from their title?
Ok, so we have a good agreement. Unfortunately this GSIP is not
going to be turned into actual code unless there is someone
willing to work on it.
Darn, I confused it with another GSIP that has probably already been
moved away, forget about what I said, this one is really alive and kicking and we're actively working on it.
But yeah, the other GSIPs that are not fully finished should be moved
in their own limbo waiting for a real push towards completion.
David, Justin, you own most of those GSIP's, care to create
that section, move the GSIP there, and take the number away
from their title?
Ok, I moved my GSIP's which have been halted from Active to Deferred. I did not see much point in recycling the number at this point... I was thinking we would just adopt the convention of not assigning a number until its put forth from here on in. Sound good?
Cheers
Andrea
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
_______________________________________________
Geoserver-devel mailing list
Geoserver-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel
!DSPAM:4007,487f1e8d119241015089218!
--
Justin Deoliveira
The Open Planning Project
jdeolive@anonymised.com
David, Justin, you own most of those GSIP's, care to create
that section, move the GSIP there, and take the number away
from their title?
Ok, I moved my GSIP's which have been halted from Active to Deferred. I did not see much point in recycling the number at this point... I was thinking we would just adopt the convention of not assigning a number until its put forth from here on in. Sound good?
Sure thing. I actually hope those "deferred" come back from their ashes,
there is good stuff in there
Cheers
Andrea
