Hi Justin,
my answers are inline below..
On 10/24/07, Justin Deoliveira <jdeolive@anonymised.com> wrote:
Indeed, way back when we decided to pull geoserver trunk off of geotools
trunk we said that we would branch 1.6.x when we got to our first RC1,
which we are pretty close to.
Also of note is some other R&D going on (H2 + WFS datastore) which is
being written solely against gt trunk. So having a GeoServer trunk to
track it would definitley be useful.
I understand and agree that it would be useful. When in the past we
were managing the raster branch we used to work against trunk and fix
bugs which were not related to our work but related to changes in the
feature part and this was all fine fr us.
This time I would put it this way. The impelling goal is to integrate
the work that we have been doing with the great work that GeoMatys has
been doing and probably extend it a little bit. I would not be happy
to add the uncertainty inherited from the fm switch, at least not for
the moment. First let us integrate things and play a bit with what is
already there then, when we are confident about what we have, we can
integrate that on 1.7.x even because I am pretty sure it will be
almost painless since the fm switch should not impact much the
coverage part (correct me if I am wrong).
So, my (reasonable 
) request is, let us branch and see how it goes
(I am sure it will go great) then let's talk about trunk later on.
A while back I created a "1.7.x" spike to test the new feature model
changes with GeoServer cite testing. It lives here:
http://svn.codehaus.org/geoserver/spike/1.7.x/
BUt has not been updated post foss4g code sprint, so it wont compile. In
terms of effort it took me about 2 days to port gs trunk over to gt
trunk and get all cite tests passing. So the level of effort might just
be less then people think.
That's exactly what I am talking about. It "might" :-). I mean, it is
not that I don't trust the work that has been done on this topic, it
is just that I cannot afford having things that were working in the
past with respect to features (shapefile, postgis, rendering, filters,
etc..) which don't work correctly anymore since we'll be using the
work we'll be doing live demos and I believe the same applies to the
geomatys guys.
So, as I said before, let us just play a couple of weeks on a branch
of 1.6.x then we may try a quick experiment on trunk after it becomes
a bit more mature.
Ciao,
Simone.
My 2c.
-Justin
Chris Holmes wrote:
> What's the time frame for starting on it? This is just an idea that
> others may shoot down, but it might be nice to have the work directly on
> trunk. Like we should branch 1.6.x when we do RC1, which should
> hopefully be pretty soon, at which point trunk can become open.
>
> It will be against GeoTools trunk, which will mean a bit more
> instability, but more hands makes for less instability, and will mean
> much less pain for everyone in the long run.
>
> Chris
>
> Simone Giannecchini wrote:
>> Hi list,
>> I am sending this email as the result of the discussion I have had
>> with the GeoMatys guys, Vincent Heurteaux and Cédric Briançon about
>> time and elevation support for WCS and WMS.
>>
>> As people on the list may know they have been hacking GeoServer for a
>> while now and what they demoed at FOSS4G was really good stuff. Well
>> lately we have discussed about ways to cooperate on this work which
>> interests all of us and we came up with the following idea.
>> We would like to create a GeoServer branch (Alessio could create it)
>> and commit the GeoMatys work there with the goal of keeping it aligned
>> with GeoServer trunk.
>> Alessio, Daniele and Cédric would at that point share the load of
>> developing this branch and keeping it aligned with trunk. Some day in
>> the not-too-far future we could merge this work with trunk or
>> probably, if things go as they should, just replace trunk with this
>> branch.
>>
>> I think that to get this started all we need would be giving Cédric
>> commit privileges on the branch so that he could commit his work
>> there. Probably in the following also Daniele could make good use of
>> commit privileges on the branch.
>>
>> Anyway, I would like to know what people think about this
>> idea/strategy and hopefully what are we supposed to do to implement it
>> (I am still not able to get my commit privileges 
)
>>
>>
>> Thx a lot,
>> Simone.
>>
>> PS
>> Sorry about the incomplete email I sent out before, I am playing with
>> my new mac but I am not much of a mac user yet
>>
>
>
> !DSPAM:4007,471f8554246292090977483!
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
> Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop.
> Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
> Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/
>
> !DSPAM:4007,471f8554246292090977483!
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Geoserver-devel mailing list
> Geoserver-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel
>
>
> !DSPAM:4007,471f8554246292090977483!
--
Justin Deoliveira
The Open Planning Project
http://topp.openplans.org
--
-------------------------------------------------------
Eng. Simone Giannecchini
President /CEO GeoSolutions S.A.S.
Via Carignoni 51
55041 Camaiore (LU)
Italy
phone: +39 0584983027
fax: +39 0584983027
mob: +39 333 8128928
http://www.geo-solutions.it
-------------------------------------------------------
