Re: [Geotools-devel] GeoTools / GeoServer Meeting 2016-06-14

2016-06-17 Thread Jody Garnett 
Thanks for the discussion, I am a bit indifferent about the options (just
so long as everyone is happy and we can plan appropriately).

--
Jody Garnett

On 17 June 2016 at 01:48, Andrea Aime  wrote:

> On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 8:13 PM, Simone Giannecchini <
> simone.giannecch...@geo-solutions.it> wrote:
>
>> Thinking...
>>
>> My first and foremost concern is stability for our clients so that's
>> why shortening the release cycle does not make me super happy.
>> If we want to chatch up with the old March/Sept timing I am ok with
>> shortening by 1M now and then another 1M next time.
>>
>> This way we will absorbe the 2.9 delay in two releases and I believe
>> people won't cut their wrists if we are one month off for a couple of
>> releases.
>>
>
> Right, it's less brutal than cutting 2.10.x down to a short 4 months cycle.
> So we'd have 2.10-beta September 18th and final October 18th,
> and 2.11-beta  Feb 18th 2017 and 2.11 final March 18th 2017...
> And indeed as Ben notes, 2.9.2 would be the last one before 2.9.x
> gets into maintenance. Along with the shortened 2.11 release cycle,
> the users availability of 2.9.x would go down to 10 months instead of the
> usual 12.
>
> If instead we keep the development of 2.10 running till the next tick and
> thus release in March 2018, we'd have a long 2.9.x stable, getting to 2.9.4
> before getting into maintenance mode, and a longer 2.8.x too as a result.
> 2.10.x would get a 10 months development cycle, which will increase the
> pressure
> to backport stuff to 2.9.x I guess, and add some stabilization risk if too
> many new features accumulate.
> Can we venture a guess if this will materialize or not? like, how many
> core changes do people
> foresee for the next months? If most of the work is going to be on
> community or
> extension modules we'd have less of a risk of course, and it's also easier
> to just backport them to stable to get the out to the user community.
>
> For the sake of completeness, with Jody last time we also discussed a
> potential
> 9 months cycle, but if memory serves me right it was going to put releases
> in some hard to staff months of the year (and the "cycle" of release dates
> would be hard to
> remember, it would repeat every 36 months) and of course the
> stabilization risk
> would be there at each release.
>
> Personally I'm a bit twisted between the first two options, seeing
> benefits and
> drawbacks in both.
>
> Cheers
> Andrea
>
> --
> ==
> GeoServer Professional Services from the experts! Visit
> http://goo.gl/it488V for more information.
> ==
>
> Ing. Andrea Aime
> @geowolf
> Technical Lead
>
> GeoSolutions S.A.S.
> Via di Montramito 3/A
> 55054  Massarosa (LU)
> phone: +39 0584 962313
> fax: +39 0584 1660272
> mob: +39  339 8844549
>
> http://www.geo-solutions.it
> http://twitter.com/geosolutions_it
>
> *AVVERTENZE AI SENSI DEL D.Lgs. 196/2003*
>
> Le informazioni contenute in questo messaggio di posta elettronica e/o
> nel/i file/s allegato/i sono da considerarsi strettamente riservate. Il
> loro utilizzo è consentito esclusivamente al destinatario del messaggio,
> per le finalità indicate nel messaggio stesso. Qualora riceviate questo
> messaggio senza esserne il destinatario, Vi preghiamo cortesemente di
> darcene notizia via e-mail e di procedere alla distruzione del messaggio
> stesso, cancellandolo dal Vostro sistema. Conservare il messaggio stesso,
> divulgarlo anche in parte, distribuirlo ad altri soggetti, copiarlo, od
> utilizzarlo per finalità diverse, costituisce comportamento contrario ai
> principi dettati dal D.Lgs. 196/2003.
>
>
>
> The information in this message and/or attachments, is intended solely for
> the attention and use of the named addressee(s) and may be confidential or
> proprietary in nature or covered by the provisions of privacy act
> (Legislative Decree June, 30 2003, no.196 - Italy's New Data Protection
> Code).Any use not in accord with its purpose, any disclosure, reproduction,
> copying, distribution, or either dissemination, either whole or partial, is
> strictly forbidden except previous formal approval of the named
> addressee(s). If you are not the intended recipient, please contact
> immediately the sender by telephone, fax or e-mail and delete the
> information in this message that has been received in error. The sender
> does not give any warranty or accept liability as the content, accuracy or
> completeness of sent messages and accepts no responsibility  for changes
> made after they were sent or for other risks which arise as a result of
> e-mail transmission, viruses, etc.
>
> ---
>
>
> --
> What NetFlow Analyzer can do for you? Monitors network bandwidth and
> traffic
> patterns at an interface-level. Reveals which users, apps, and protocols
> are
> consuming the most bandwidth. Provides multi-vendor support for

Re: [Geotools-devel] GeoTools / GeoServer Meeting 2016-06-14

2016-06-17 Thread Andrea Aime 
On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 8:13 PM, Simone Giannecchini <
simone.giannecch...@geo-solutions.it> wrote:

> Thinking...
>
> My first and foremost concern is stability for our clients so that's
> why shortening the release cycle does not make me super happy.
> If we want to chatch up with the old March/Sept timing I am ok with
> shortening by 1M now and then another 1M next time.
>
> This way we will absorbe the 2.9 delay in two releases and I believe
> people won't cut their wrists if we are one month off for a couple of
> releases.
>

Right, it's less brutal than cutting 2.10.x down to a short 4 months cycle.
So we'd have 2.10-beta September 18th and final October 18th,
and 2.11-beta  Feb 18th 2017 and 2.11 final March 18th 2017...
And indeed as Ben notes, 2.9.2 would be the last one before 2.9.x
gets into maintenance. Along with the shortened 2.11 release cycle,
the users availability of 2.9.x would go down to 10 months instead of the
usual 12.

If instead we keep the development of 2.10 running till the next tick and
thus release in March 2018, we'd have a long 2.9.x stable, getting to 2.9.4
before getting into maintenance mode, and a longer 2.8.x too as a result.
2.10.x would get a 10 months development cycle, which will increase the
pressure
to backport stuff to 2.9.x I guess, and add some stabilization risk if too
many new features accumulate.
Can we venture a guess if this will materialize or not? like, how many core
changes do people
foresee for the next months? If most of the work is going to be on
community or
extension modules we'd have less of a risk of course, and it's also easier
to just backport them to stable to get the out to the user community.

For the sake of completeness, with Jody last time we also discussed a
potential
9 months cycle, but if memory serves me right it was going to put releases
in some hard to staff months of the year (and the "cycle" of release dates
would be hard to
remember, it would repeat every 36 months) and of course the
stabilization risk
would be there at each release.

Personally I'm a bit twisted between the first two options, seeing benefits
and
drawbacks in both.

Cheers
Andrea

-- 
==
GeoServer Professional Services from the experts! Visit
http://goo.gl/it488V for more information.
==

Ing. Andrea Aime
@geowolf
Technical Lead

GeoSolutions S.A.S.
Via di Montramito 3/A
55054  Massarosa (LU)
phone: +39 0584 962313
fax: +39 0584 1660272
mob: +39  339 8844549

http://www.geo-solutions.it
http://twitter.com/geosolutions_it

*AVVERTENZE AI SENSI DEL D.Lgs. 196/2003*

Le informazioni contenute in questo messaggio di posta elettronica e/o
nel/i file/s allegato/i sono da considerarsi strettamente riservate. Il
loro utilizzo è consentito esclusivamente al destinatario del messaggio,
per le finalità indicate nel messaggio stesso. Qualora riceviate questo
messaggio senza esserne il destinatario, Vi preghiamo cortesemente di
darcene notizia via e-mail e di procedere alla distruzione del messaggio
stesso, cancellandolo dal Vostro sistema. Conservare il messaggio stesso,
divulgarlo anche in parte, distribuirlo ad altri soggetti, copiarlo, od
utilizzarlo per finalità diverse, costituisce comportamento contrario ai
principi dettati dal D.Lgs. 196/2003.



The information in this message and/or attachments, is intended solely for
the attention and use of the named addressee(s) and may be confidential or
proprietary in nature or covered by the provisions of privacy act
(Legislative Decree June, 30 2003, no.196 - Italy's New Data Protection
Code).Any use not in accord with its purpose, any disclosure, reproduction,
copying, distribution, or either dissemination, either whole or partial, is
strictly forbidden except previous formal approval of the named
addressee(s). If you are not the intended recipient, please contact
immediately the sender by telephone, fax or e-mail and delete the
information in this message that has been received in error. The sender
does not give any warranty or accept liability as the content, accuracy or
completeness of sent messages and accepts no responsibility  for changes
made after they were sent or for other risks which arise as a result of
e-mail transmission, viruses, etc.

---
--
What NetFlow Analyzer can do for you? Monitors network bandwidth and traffic
patterns at an interface-level. Reveals which users, apps, and protocols are 
consuming the most bandwidth. Provides multi-vendor support for NetFlow, 
J-Flow, sFlow and other flows. Make informed decisions using capacity planning
reports. http://sdm.link/zohomanageengine___
GeoTools-Devel mailing list
GeoTools-Devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geotools-devel

Re: [Geotools-devel] GeoTools / GeoServer Meeting 2016-06-14

2016-06-16 Thread Simone Giannecchini 
Thinking...

My first and foremost concern is stability for our clients so that's
why shortening the release cycle does not make me super happy.
If we want to chatch up with the old March/Sept timing I am ok with
shortening by 1M now and then another 1M next time.

This way we will absorbe the 2.9 delay in two releases and I believe
people won't cut their wrists if we are one month off for a couple of
releases.

I did not discuss this with Andrea, let's see if he has some
additional feedback.

Regards,
Simone Giannecchini
==
GeoServer Professional Services from the experts!
Visit http://goo.gl/it488V for more information.
==
Ing. Simone Giannecchini
@simogeo
Founder/Director

GeoSolutions S.A.S.
Via di Montramito 3/A
55054  Massarosa (LU)
Italy
phone: +39 0584 962313
fax: +39 0584 1660272
mob:   +39  333 8128928

http://www.geo-solutions.it
http://twitter.com/geosolutions_it

---
AVVERTENZE AI SENSI DEL D.Lgs. 196/2003
Le informazioni contenute in questo messaggio di posta elettronica e/o
nel/i file/s allegato/i sono da considerarsi strettamente riservate.
Il loro utilizzo è consentito esclusivamente al destinatario del
messaggio, per le finalità indicate nel messaggio stesso. Qualora
riceviate questo messaggio senza esserne il destinatario, Vi preghiamo
cortesemente di darcene notizia via e-mail e di procedere alla
distruzione del messaggio stesso, cancellandolo dal Vostro sistema.
Conservare il messaggio stesso, divulgarlo anche in parte,
distribuirlo ad altri soggetti, copiarlo, od utilizzarlo per finalità
diverse, costituisce comportamento contrario ai principi dettati dal
D.Lgs. 196/2003.

The information in this message and/or attachments, is intended solely
for the attention and use of the named addressee(s) and may be
confidential or proprietary in nature or covered by the provisions of
privacy act (Legislative Decree June, 30 2003, no.196 - Italy's New
Data Protection Code).Any use not in accord with its purpose, any
disclosure, reproduction, copying, distribution, or either
dissemination, either whole or partial, is strictly forbidden except
previous formal approval of the named addressee(s). If you are not the
intended recipient, please contact immediately the sender by
telephone, fax or e-mail and delete the information in this message
that has been received in error. The sender does not give any warranty
or accept liability as the content, accuracy or completeness of sent
messages and accepts no responsibility  for changes made after they
were sent or for other risks which arise as a result of e-mail
transmission, viruses, etc.


On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 4:01 AM, Ben Caradoc-Davies  wrote:
> Or if the March/September cadence is useful to ensure availability, we could
> wait until March (that is have a long 2.9.x cycle).
>
> Or we could choose an October release for 2.10.0, that is one month late. We
> are trying to make up two months, so we could take one from 2.9.x stable and
> one from 2.10.x stable. That does seem too short to me. 2.9.2 would be the
> last stable 2.9.x before it goes into maintenance.
>
> Kind regards,
> Ben.
>
>
> On 16/06/16 08:20, Jody Garnett wrote:
>>
>> I was just updating the schedule, based on what I remembered of the
>> discussion. This is why it is in the meeting notes so we can sort this
>> out.
>>
>> So if we go the other way are we looking at a November release?
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 12:16 PM Simone Giannecchini <
>> simone.giannecch...@geo-solutions.it> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi All,
>>> one thing strikes me here:
>>> "We are looking at a short release cycle due to release delays of 2.9."
>>>
>>> Looking as in "yeah, that would be a bad idea"? :)
>>>
>>> What is the rationale behind making the life of 2.9 shorter? Its birth
>>> was difficult hence I would expect extra care before moving to 2.10.
>>> The clients I talk to do not usually rush towards new releases so
>>> making a release shorter does not help with building more confidence,
>>> I am afraid.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Simone Giannecchini
>>> ==
>>> GeoServer Professional Services from the experts!
>>> Visit http://goo.gl/it488V for more information.
>>> ==
>>> Ing. Simone Giannecchini
>>> @simogeo
>>> Founder/Director
>>>
>>> GeoSolutions S.A.S.
>>> Via di Montramito 3/A
>>> 55054  Massarosa (LU)
>>> Italy
>>> phone: +39 0584 962313
>>> fax: +39 0584 1660272
>>> mob:   +39 333 8128928
>>>
>>> http://www.geo-solutions.it
>>> http://twitter.com/geosolutions_it
>>>
>>> ---
>>> AVVERTENZE AI SENSI DEL D.Lgs. 196/2003
>>> Le informazioni contenute in questo messaggio di posta elettronica e/o
>>> nel/i file/s allegato/i sono da considerarsi strettamente riservate.
>>> Il loro utilizzo è consentito esclusivamente al destinatario del
>>> messaggio, per le finalità indicate nel messaggio stesso. Qualora
>>> riceviate questo messaggio senza esserne il destinatario, Vi preghiamo

Re: [Geotools-devel] GeoTools / GeoServer Meeting 2016-06-14

2016-06-15 Thread Ben Caradoc-Davies 
Or if the March/September cadence is useful to ensure availability, we 
could wait until March (that is have a long 2.9.x cycle).

Or we could choose an October release for 2.10.0, that is one month 
late. We are trying to make up two months, so we could take one from 
2.9.x stable and one from 2.10.x stable. That does seem too short to me. 
2.9.2 would be the last stable 2.9.x before it goes into maintenance.

Kind regards,
Ben.

On 16/06/16 08:20, Jody Garnett wrote:
> I was just updating the schedule, based on what I remembered of the
> discussion. This is why it is in the meeting notes so we can sort this out.
>
> So if we go the other way are we looking at a November release?
>
> On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 12:16 PM Simone Giannecchini <
> simone.giannecch...@geo-solutions.it> wrote:
>
>> Hi All,
>> one thing strikes me here:
>> "We are looking at a short release cycle due to release delays of 2.9."
>>
>> Looking as in "yeah, that would be a bad idea"? :)
>>
>> What is the rationale behind making the life of 2.9 shorter? Its birth
>> was difficult hence I would expect extra care before moving to 2.10.
>> The clients I talk to do not usually rush towards new releases so
>> making a release shorter does not help with building more confidence,
>> I am afraid.
>>
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>> Simone Giannecchini
>> ==
>> GeoServer Professional Services from the experts!
>> Visit http://goo.gl/it488V for more information.
>> ==
>> Ing. Simone Giannecchini
>> @simogeo
>> Founder/Director
>>
>> GeoSolutions S.A.S.
>> Via di Montramito 3/A
>> 55054  Massarosa (LU)
>> Italy
>> phone: +39 0584 962313
>> fax: +39 0584 1660272
>> mob:   +39  333 8128928
>>
>> http://www.geo-solutions.it
>> http://twitter.com/geosolutions_it
>>
>> ---
>> AVVERTENZE AI SENSI DEL D.Lgs. 196/2003
>> Le informazioni contenute in questo messaggio di posta elettronica e/o
>> nel/i file/s allegato/i sono da considerarsi strettamente riservate.
>> Il loro utilizzo è consentito esclusivamente al destinatario del
>> messaggio, per le finalità indicate nel messaggio stesso. Qualora
>> riceviate questo messaggio senza esserne il destinatario, Vi preghiamo
>> cortesemente di darcene notizia via e-mail e di procedere alla
>> distruzione del messaggio stesso, cancellandolo dal Vostro sistema.
>> Conservare il messaggio stesso, divulgarlo anche in parte,
>> distribuirlo ad altri soggetti, copiarlo, od utilizzarlo per finalità
>> diverse, costituisce comportamento contrario ai principi dettati dal
>> D.Lgs. 196/2003.
>>
>> The information in this message and/or attachments, is intended solely
>> for the attention and use of the named addressee(s) and may be
>> confidential or proprietary in nature or covered by the provisions of
>> privacy act (Legislative Decree June, 30 2003, no.196 - Italy's New
>> Data Protection Code).Any use not in accord with its purpose, any
>> disclosure, reproduction, copying, distribution, or either
>> dissemination, either whole or partial, is strictly forbidden except
>> previous formal approval of the named addressee(s). If you are not the
>> intended recipient, please contact immediately the sender by
>> telephone, fax or e-mail and delete the information in this message
>> that has been received in error. The sender does not give any warranty
>> or accept liability as the content, accuracy or completeness of sent
>> messages and accepts no responsibility  for changes made after they
>> were sent or for other risks which arise as a result of e-mail
>> transmission, viruses, etc.
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 10:47 PM, Ben Caradoc-Davies 
>> wrote:
>>> GeoTools / GeoServer Meeting 2016-06-14
>>> ===
>>>
>>> Attending
>>> -
>>>
>>> Ben Caradoc-Davies
>>> Jody Garnett
>>> Torben Barsballe
>>>
>>> Apologies
>>> -
>>>
>>> Ian Turton
>>>
>>> Agenda
>>> --
>>>
>>> - GeoServer OSGeo Project Officer
>>> - Release schedule
>>> - OSGeo update
>>> - Upgrade to NetCDF-Java 4.6.6
>>> - ImageMosaic refactoring part 1
>>> - Pull requests
>>>
>>> Actions
>>> ---
>>>
>>> - Jody: encourage updates to docs/jira to record Simone as GeoServer
>>> project officer
>>> - Alessandro and Andrea: release 14.4 / 2.8.4
>>>
>>> Actions from last meeting
>>> -
>>>
>>> - Ben to email list to ask for more PMC votes on OSGeo copyright header
>>> legal advice [DONE]
>>> - Jody: Contact Justin to declare GeoTools copyright header policy
>>> change done, merge in change to developers guide [DONE]
>>>
>>> GeoServer OSGeo Project Officer
>>> ---
>>>
>>> Simone Giannecchini has volunteered:
>>> - OSGeo board updated
>>> - website:
>>> http://www.osgeo.org/content/foundation/board_and_officers.html (done)
>>> - wiki: https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Contacts (done)
>>> - jira: https://osgeo-org.atlassian.net/projects/GEOS (not yet)
>>>
>>> Release schedule
>>> 
>>>
>>>

Re: [Geotools-devel] GeoTools / GeoServer Meeting 2016-06-14

2016-06-15 Thread Jody Garnett 
I was just updating the schedule, based on what I remembered of the
discussion. This is why it is in the meeting notes so we can sort this out.

So if we go the other way are we looking at a November release?

On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 12:16 PM Simone Giannecchini <
simone.giannecch...@geo-solutions.it> wrote:

> Hi All,
> one thing strikes me here:
> "We are looking at a short release cycle due to release delays of 2.9."
>
> Looking as in "yeah, that would be a bad idea"? :)
>
> What is the rationale behind making the life of 2.9 shorter? Its birth
> was difficult hence I would expect extra care before moving to 2.10.
> The clients I talk to do not usually rush towards new releases so
> making a release shorter does not help with building more confidence,
> I am afraid.
>
>
>
> Regards,
> Simone Giannecchini
> ==
> GeoServer Professional Services from the experts!
> Visit http://goo.gl/it488V for more information.
> ==
> Ing. Simone Giannecchini
> @simogeo
> Founder/Director
>
> GeoSolutions S.A.S.
> Via di Montramito 3/A
> 55054  Massarosa (LU)
> Italy
> phone: +39 0584 962313
> fax: +39 0584 1660272
> mob:   +39  333 8128928
>
> http://www.geo-solutions.it
> http://twitter.com/geosolutions_it
>
> ---
> AVVERTENZE AI SENSI DEL D.Lgs. 196/2003
> Le informazioni contenute in questo messaggio di posta elettronica e/o
> nel/i file/s allegato/i sono da considerarsi strettamente riservate.
> Il loro utilizzo è consentito esclusivamente al destinatario del
> messaggio, per le finalità indicate nel messaggio stesso. Qualora
> riceviate questo messaggio senza esserne il destinatario, Vi preghiamo
> cortesemente di darcene notizia via e-mail e di procedere alla
> distruzione del messaggio stesso, cancellandolo dal Vostro sistema.
> Conservare il messaggio stesso, divulgarlo anche in parte,
> distribuirlo ad altri soggetti, copiarlo, od utilizzarlo per finalità
> diverse, costituisce comportamento contrario ai principi dettati dal
> D.Lgs. 196/2003.
>
> The information in this message and/or attachments, is intended solely
> for the attention and use of the named addressee(s) and may be
> confidential or proprietary in nature or covered by the provisions of
> privacy act (Legislative Decree June, 30 2003, no.196 - Italy's New
> Data Protection Code).Any use not in accord with its purpose, any
> disclosure, reproduction, copying, distribution, or either
> dissemination, either whole or partial, is strictly forbidden except
> previous formal approval of the named addressee(s). If you are not the
> intended recipient, please contact immediately the sender by
> telephone, fax or e-mail and delete the information in this message
> that has been received in error. The sender does not give any warranty
> or accept liability as the content, accuracy or completeness of sent
> messages and accepts no responsibility  for changes made after they
> were sent or for other risks which arise as a result of e-mail
> transmission, viruses, etc.
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 10:47 PM, Ben Caradoc-Davies 
> wrote:
> > GeoTools / GeoServer Meeting 2016-06-14
> > ===
> >
> > Attending
> > -
> >
> > Ben Caradoc-Davies
> > Jody Garnett
> > Torben Barsballe
> >
> > Apologies
> > -
> >
> > Ian Turton
> >
> > Agenda
> > --
> >
> > - GeoServer OSGeo Project Officer
> > - Release schedule
> > - OSGeo update
> > - Upgrade to NetCDF-Java 4.6.6
> > - ImageMosaic refactoring part 1
> > - Pull requests
> >
> > Actions
> > ---
> >
> > - Jody: encourage updates to docs/jira to record Simone as GeoServer
> > project officer
> > - Alessandro and Andrea: release 14.4 / 2.8.4
> >
> > Actions from last meeting
> > -
> >
> > - Ben to email list to ask for more PMC votes on OSGeo copyright header
> > legal advice [DONE]
> > - Jody: Contact Justin to declare GeoTools copyright header policy
> > change done, merge in change to developers guide [DONE]
> >
> > GeoServer OSGeo Project Officer
> > ---
> >
> > Simone Giannecchini has volunteered:
> > - OSGeo board updated
> > - website:
> > http://www.osgeo.org/content/foundation/board_and_officers.html (done)
> > - wiki: https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Contacts (done)
> > - jira: https://osgeo-org.atlassian.net/projects/GEOS (not yet)
> >
> > Release schedule
> > 
> >
> > Updated the release schedule:
> > https://github.com/geoserver/geoserver/wiki/Release-Schedule
> >
> > We are looking at a short release cycle due to release delays of 2.9.
> >
> > - Alessandro and Andrea have (been) volunteered to release 14.4 / 2.8.4
> >
> > Release priorities/ideas/mad plans for GeoServer 2.10 release timeframe:
> > - Jody and Devon are taking a run at GeoTools codebase prior to foss4g
> > workshop in August. Intend to update library for Java 8 syntax.
> > - Status endpoint is collecting more and more sanity checks (expect GUI
> >

Re: [Geotools-devel] GeoTools / GeoServer Meeting 2016-06-14

2016-06-15 Thread Simone Giannecchini 
Hi All,
one thing strikes me here:
"We are looking at a short release cycle due to release delays of 2.9."

Looking as in "yeah, that would be a bad idea"? :)

What is the rationale behind making the life of 2.9 shorter? Its birth
was difficult hence I would expect extra care before moving to 2.10.
The clients I talk to do not usually rush towards new releases so
making a release shorter does not help with building more confidence,
I am afraid.



Regards,
Simone Giannecchini
==
GeoServer Professional Services from the experts!
Visit http://goo.gl/it488V for more information.
==
Ing. Simone Giannecchini
@simogeo
Founder/Director

GeoSolutions S.A.S.
Via di Montramito 3/A
55054  Massarosa (LU)
Italy
phone: +39 0584 962313
fax: +39 0584 1660272
mob:   +39  333 8128928

http://www.geo-solutions.it
http://twitter.com/geosolutions_it

---
AVVERTENZE AI SENSI DEL D.Lgs. 196/2003
Le informazioni contenute in questo messaggio di posta elettronica e/o
nel/i file/s allegato/i sono da considerarsi strettamente riservate.
Il loro utilizzo è consentito esclusivamente al destinatario del
messaggio, per le finalità indicate nel messaggio stesso. Qualora
riceviate questo messaggio senza esserne il destinatario, Vi preghiamo
cortesemente di darcene notizia via e-mail e di procedere alla
distruzione del messaggio stesso, cancellandolo dal Vostro sistema.
Conservare il messaggio stesso, divulgarlo anche in parte,
distribuirlo ad altri soggetti, copiarlo, od utilizzarlo per finalità
diverse, costituisce comportamento contrario ai principi dettati dal
D.Lgs. 196/2003.

The information in this message and/or attachments, is intended solely
for the attention and use of the named addressee(s) and may be
confidential or proprietary in nature or covered by the provisions of
privacy act (Legislative Decree June, 30 2003, no.196 - Italy's New
Data Protection Code).Any use not in accord with its purpose, any
disclosure, reproduction, copying, distribution, or either
dissemination, either whole or partial, is strictly forbidden except
previous formal approval of the named addressee(s). If you are not the
intended recipient, please contact immediately the sender by
telephone, fax or e-mail and delete the information in this message
that has been received in error. The sender does not give any warranty
or accept liability as the content, accuracy or completeness of sent
messages and accepts no responsibility  for changes made after they
were sent or for other risks which arise as a result of e-mail
transmission, viruses, etc.


On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 10:47 PM, Ben Caradoc-Davies  wrote:
> GeoTools / GeoServer Meeting 2016-06-14
> ===
>
> Attending
> -
>
> Ben Caradoc-Davies
> Jody Garnett
> Torben Barsballe
>
> Apologies
> -
>
> Ian Turton
>
> Agenda
> --
>
> - GeoServer OSGeo Project Officer
> - Release schedule
> - OSGeo update
> - Upgrade to NetCDF-Java 4.6.6
> - ImageMosaic refactoring part 1
> - Pull requests
>
> Actions
> ---
>
> - Jody: encourage updates to docs/jira to record Simone as GeoServer
> project officer
> - Alessandro and Andrea: release 14.4 / 2.8.4
>
> Actions from last meeting
> -
>
> - Ben to email list to ask for more PMC votes on OSGeo copyright header
> legal advice [DONE]
> - Jody: Contact Justin to declare GeoTools copyright header policy
> change done, merge in change to developers guide [DONE]
>
> GeoServer OSGeo Project Officer
> ---
>
> Simone Giannecchini has volunteered:
> - OSGeo board updated
> - website:
> http://www.osgeo.org/content/foundation/board_and_officers.html (done)
> - wiki: https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Contacts (done)
> - jira: https://osgeo-org.atlassian.net/projects/GEOS (not yet)
>
> Release schedule
> 
>
> Updated the release schedule:
> https://github.com/geoserver/geoserver/wiki/Release-Schedule
>
> We are looking at a short release cycle due to release delays of 2.9.
>
> - Alessandro and Andrea have (been) volunteered to release 14.4 / 2.8.4
>
> Release priorities/ideas/mad plans for GeoServer 2.10 release timeframe:
> - Jody and Devon are taking a run at GeoTools codebase prior to foss4g
> workshop in August. Intend to update library for Java 8 syntax.
> - Status endpoint is collecting more and more sanity checks (expect GUI
> during 2.10.x timeframe?) https://osgeo-org.atlassian.net/browse/GEOS-4585
> https://osgeo-org.atlassian.net/browse/GEOS-7567
> - ImageMosaic api refactor ongoing
> - VectorTiles documentation
>
> OSGeo update
> 
>
> Board has been informed of new GeoServer project officer.
>
> Board approved asking for legal advice on GeoTools header policy.
> Ben/Jody are working with Michael Smith on this one
>
> OSGeo Marketing committee has asked how they can help:
> - GeoTools: Encourage committers, always encourage committers
> - GeoServer: Encourage