On 9/20/07, Jody Garnett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Thanks Adrian, I was not really interested in a discussion of the GeoAPI > Geometry model. The proposal for an API change is all about GeoTools and > making sure that we can plugin the implementations of geometry we have > available to us. > > The fact that I am not getting a PMC vote says that either a) the change > procedure is not working or b) everyone is busy prepping for FOSS4G. > > The fact is that Graham is new to GeoTools development procedure and is > doing his best to play by the rules; if we don't follow through on our > end we are back to the unstable development practices of last year that > caused everyone worry. > > This kind of change would of caused one email last year; as it is this > has taken two months - the code is in the code base and released > already, documentation exists. > > PMC members - I understand if you do not need ISO Geometry for your > application, we are not looking for a discussion of merit or geotools > integration at this time. > Only your vote. >
+1 Ian PS busy preping for FOSS4G ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ Geotools-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geotools-devel
