Hi Jody, Sorry for the late reply, just back from vacation :).
This all sounds reasonable. You are indeed correct that the proposal is not complete yet. I still have yet to get around to amending it with your original feedback. I will be sure to include this in it as well. I will hopefully have it finished this week. -Justin Jody Garnett wrote: > Hi Justin; the WPS team went to try and use this proposal but it is not > ready yet :-( > > We tried talking about it in todays IRC meeting and got stalled out on > the issue of having a maintainer. > > The balance here is one of resources: > - on one side donating code to GeoServer cannot be a sentence to provide > a staff member on call forever > - on the other side donating code to GeoServer does not mean the > community will maintain the code for free > > Andrea and I eventually worked out the compromise of either having a > maintainer; or letting the PSC act like one (including kicking the > module back to community status if needed). We both want to learn from > the GeoTools experience of shapefile patches piling up in Jira. > > It sounds like it too late for this procedure to be followed by the WPS > team for this phase of the project. It would be very good if this > procedure could be worked out prior to negotiating for continued work. > > Cheers, > Jody > > Jody Garnett wrote: >> See earlier review of all the GSIP's there is some overlap between these >> two: >> - http://geoserver.org/display/GEOS/GSIP+17+-+Community+module+handling >> - http://geoserver.org/display/GEOS/GSIP+22+-+Extensions >> >> Can this be resolved; or combined into a single policy change separating >> out the difference between how these are handled? >> The GSIP+22 will need to change or define project build procedure; we >> should figure out what documentation pages >> need to be updated? >> - Can we have a procedure for "removing an extension" >> - Since these are a lot more formal than community modules; can we get a >> wiki page with docs? Or even a formal installation/useage doc? >> >> I am correct in thinking these are full fledged running modules (like >> WPS?) that are ready to go - they are just not in the default GeoServer >> download. As such I would like to hold them to the same high standard. >> >> 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 > [email protected] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel > > !DSPAM:4007,488f788e160291336712104! > -- Justin Deoliveira The Open Planning Project [EMAIL PROTECTED] ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel
