[Geoserver-devel] moving forward with 2.1 beta release

Hi all,

After digging into recent cite issues explained on the list we are good to go for wms and wfs. Although wfs requires that estimated extents be turned off in postgis. Those tests are now running nightly via hudson.

For wcs 1.0 a few issues still remain outstanding. Of which I believe the following are more or less trivial:

http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/GEOS-4115
http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/GEOS-4116
http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/GEOS-4117

For wcs 1.1 the multi part encoding issue with non geotiff formats i am unsure of. Should we just force the tests to run only with geotiff output?

So with cite testing generally under control shall we move forward with a release? Are there any show stopping issues that come to mind for people?

-Justin


Justin Deoliveira
OpenGeo - http://opengeo.org
Enterprise support for open source geospatial.

Sounds great justin; can I ask what kind of release this is? Do we
need to release geotools as well (or just tag)?

Jody

On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 12:49 PM, Justin Deoliveira <jdeolive@anonymised.com> wrote:

Hi all,
After digging into recent cite issues explained on the list we are good to
go for wms and wfs. Although wfs requires that estimated extents be turned
off in postgis. Those tests are now running nightly via hudson.
For wcs 1.0 a few issues still remain outstanding. Of which I believe the
following are more or less trivial:
http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/GEOS-4115
http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/GEOS-4116
http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/GEOS-4117
For wcs 1.1 the multi part encoding issue with non geotiff formats i am
unsure of. Should we just force the tests to run only with geotiff output?
So with cite testing generally under control shall we move forward with a
release? Are there any show stopping issues that come to mind for people?
-Justin
--
Justin Deoliveira
OpenGeo - http://opengeo.org
Enterprise support for open source geospatial.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net Dev2Dev email is sponsored by:

Show off your parallel programming skills.
Enter the Intel(R) Threading Challenge 2010.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-thread-sfd
_______________________________________________
Geoserver-devel mailing list
Geoserver-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel

This would just be a beta, so nothing too official. While I don’t think our process requires an official geotools release for a beta I could be talked into releasing a geotools milestone if it were more or less ready to go. What do you think Jody?

On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 12:20 AM, Jody Garnett <jody.garnett@anonymised.com> wrote:

Sounds great justin; can I ask what kind of release this is? Do we
need to release geotools as well (or just tag)?

Jody

On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 12:49 PM, Justin Deoliveira <jdeolive@anonymised.com> wrote:

Hi all,
After digging into recent cite issues explained on the list we are good to
go for wms and wfs. Although wfs requires that estimated extents be turned
off in postgis. Those tests are now running nightly via hudson.
For wcs 1.0 a few issues still remain outstanding. Of which I believe the
following are more or less trivial:
http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/GEOS-4115
http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/GEOS-4116
http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/GEOS-4117
For wcs 1.1 the multi part encoding issue with non geotiff formats i am
unsure of. Should we just force the tests to run only with geotiff output?
So with cite testing generally under control shall we move forward with a
release? Are there any show stopping issues that come to mind for people?
-Justin

Justin Deoliveira
OpenGeo - http://opengeo.org
Enterprise support for open source geospatial.


This SF.net Dev2Dev email is sponsored by:

Show off your parallel programming skills.
Enter the Intel(R) Threading Challenge 2010.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-thread-sfd


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


Justin Deoliveira
OpenGeo - http://opengeo.org
Enterprise support for open source geospatial.

Justin Deoliveira ha scritto:

This would just be a beta, so nothing too official. While I don't think our process requires an official geotools release for a beta I could be talked into releasing a geotools milestone if it were more or less ready to go. What do you think Jody?

Following the same reasoning, do we really need it to pass all the CITE
tests?
Afaik we never asked a beta to pass them, but I may be wrong

Cheers
Andrea

--
Andrea Aime
OpenGeo - http://opengeo.org
Expert service straight from the developers.

Yeah I know. But I figured doing it now can’t hurt. We are pretty close. Everything but wcs 1.1. So i figure it is time well spent.

On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 9:16 AM, Andrea Aime <aaime@anonymised.com> wrote:

Justin Deoliveira ha scritto:

This would just be a beta, so nothing too official. While I don’t think our process requires an official geotools release for a beta I could be talked into releasing a geotools milestone if it were more or less ready to go. What do you think Jody?

Following the same reasoning, do we really need it to pass all the CITE
tests?
Afaik we never asked a beta to pass them, but I may be wrong

Cheers
Andrea


Andrea Aime
OpenGeo - http://opengeo.org
Expert service straight from the developers.


Justin Deoliveira
OpenGeo - http://opengeo.org
Enterprise support for open source geospatial.

It has taken me 1/2 day to release geotools lately. Only trouble has been extensive tests on a couple of macs (there is an open bug report and thus far only Jesse and myself have trouble; other macs are doing fine).

So if it is not too much trouble a GeoTools release would be a good talking point at FOSS4G.

Jody

On 01/09/2010, at 2:20 PM, Jody Garnett wrote:

Sounds great justin; can I ask what kind of release this is? Do we
need to release geotools as well (or just tag)?

Jody

On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 12:49 PM, Justin Deoliveira <jdeolive@anonymised.com> wrote:

Hi all,
After digging into recent cite issues explained on the list we are good to
go for wms and wfs. Although wfs requires that estimated extents be turned
off in postgis. Those tests are now running nightly via hudson.
For wcs 1.0 a few issues still remain outstanding. Of which I believe the
following are more or less trivial:
http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/GEOS-4115
http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/GEOS-4116
http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/GEOS-4117
For wcs 1.1 the multi part encoding issue with non geotiff formats i am
unsure of. Should we just force the tests to run only with geotiff output?
So with cite testing generally under control shall we move forward with a
release? Are there any show stopping issues that come to mind for people?
-Justin
--
Justin Deoliveira
OpenGeo - http://opengeo.org
Enterprise support for open source geospatial.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net Dev2Dev email is sponsored by:

Show off your parallel programming skills.
Enter the Intel(R) Threading Challenge 2010.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-thread-sfd
_______________________________________________
Geoserver-devel mailing list
Geoserver-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel

Hi,
could I close http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/GEOS-4101?
It is related to the part of the GUI for coverage settings customization (As an instance, about thread pool executor settings). As reported in my last comment, a proper icon is missing (I have set the page to use the same icon for JAI settings). In case setting the icon is not critical, I think we can close it now and update the icon afterwards.

Daniele

On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 4:39 PM, Jody Garnett <jody.garnett@anonymised.com> wrote:

It has taken me 1/2 day to release geotools lately. Only trouble has been extensive tests on a couple of macs (there is an open bug report and thus far only Jesse and myself have trouble; other macs are doing fine).

So if it is not too much trouble a GeoTools release would be a good talking point at FOSS4G.

Jody

On 01/09/2010, at 2:20 PM, Jody Garnett wrote:

Sounds great justin; can I ask what kind of release this is? Do we
need to release geotools as well (or just tag)?

Jody

On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 12:49 PM, Justin Deoliveira <jdeolive@anonymised.com> wrote:

Hi all,
After digging into recent cite issues explained on the list we are good to
go for wms and wfs. Although wfs requires that estimated extents be turned
off in postgis. Those tests are now running nightly via hudson.
For wcs 1.0 a few issues still remain outstanding. Of which I believe the
following are more or less trivial:
http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/GEOS-4115
http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/GEOS-4116
http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/GEOS-4117
For wcs 1.1 the multi part encoding issue with non geotiff formats i am
unsure of. Should we just force the tests to run only with geotiff output?
So with cite testing generally under control shall we move forward with a
release? Are there any show stopping issues that come to mind for people?
-Justin

Justin Deoliveira
OpenGeo - http://opengeo.org
Enterprise support for open source geospatial.


This SF.net Dev2Dev email is sponsored by:

Show off your parallel programming skills.
Enter the Intel(R) Threading Challenge 2010.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-thread-sfd


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


This SF.net Dev2Dev email is sponsored by:

Show off your parallel programming skills.
Enter the Intel(R) Threading Challenge 2010.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-thread-sfd


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

Eng. Daniele Romagnoli
Software Engineer

GeoSolutions S.A.S.
Via Carignoni 51
55041 Camaiore (LU)
Italy

phone: +39 0584962313
fax: +39 0584962313
mob: +39 328 0559267

http://www.geo-solutions.it


Daniele Romagnoli ha scritto:

Hi,
could I close http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/GEOS-4101?
It is related to the part of the GUI for coverage settings customization (As an instance, about thread pool executor settings). As reported in my last comment, a proper icon is missing (I have set the page to use the same icon for JAI settings). In case setting the icon is not critical, I think we can close it now and update the icon afterwards.

My 2c: the icon is not critical. I'd say go ahead, close and let's move
forward

Cheers
Andrea

--
Andrea Aime
OpenGeo - http://opengeo.org
Expert service straight from the developers.