On 28-Feb-07, at 11:06 AM, Bob Basques wrote:
I'm wondering about finding a new home for a Mapping Client Project.
What requirements are there for proposing a new project under the
OSGEO
Umbrella?
I can set up a Physical home for it, but was wondering more about
having
OSGEO handling the
Arnulf,
"Managed Web Mapping Application Framework"
That's pretty good. I've been looking for a description just about
like that. :c)
While we haven't got the specific capability of building a client from
the Server in place (yet) the MOOSE frame work certainly is intended to
do so. As you
Bob Basques wrote:
All,
The MOOSE project has been working with essentially the same philosophy,
with regards to normalizing the code into distinct Chunks, which make
the mixing and matching very easy. Integrating services into it are
very easy for example.
I think our coding style is ve
All,
The MOOSE project has been working with essentially the same
philosophy, with regards to normalizing the code into distinct Chunks,
which make the mixing and matching very easy. Integrating services into
it are very easy for example.
I think our coding style is very much aligned with oth
* On 1-Mar-2007 at 2:11AM PST, Cameron Shorter said:
>
> Where possible, common libraries should be extracted from projects,
> allowing developers to focus on other problems.
> However, emotionally it is hard to merge two or more projects. If two
> projects merge together, roughly half of each
Bob, I'd like to mirror Paul and Christopher's comments.
There are a lot of browser based mapping clients available, many of them
Open Source.
From a user's point of view, this is confusing rather than useful.
"Should I get features A,B,C,D or A,C,E,G?"
Where possible, common libraries should
Hi Bob ...
I should have said that was my take on the OSGeo policy, hopefully
someone (Frank) will correct me if I misled you anywhere.
Personally, I think it is important to have some diversity and
exploration into new approaches to solving some of these problems.
That being said, there
I apologize for the previous Email. We went to GroupWise here, and I
just got converted. Danged if I can figure out how to do an Inline
reply.
. . . . Grumble, grumble . . . .
Let me know if I need to make this prettier.
bobb
You can't be late until you show up.
You can't be late until you show up.
***
You never learn anything by doing it right.
*** War doesn't determine who's right. War determines who's left.
***
>>> Christopher Schmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2/28/2007 2:45 PM
>>>
On Wed,
On Wed, Feb 28, 2007 at 02:22:37PM -0600, Bob Basques wrote:
> Paul,
>
> It's funny you put it the way you did. From an Email exchange today
> about how our project compares ti OpenLayers :
>
> This is how I see them as being different. Others, feel free to chime
> in.
>
> Moose has more of th
Paul,
It's funny you put it the way you did. From an Email exchange today
about how our project compares ti OpenLayers :
This is how I see them as being different. Others, feel free to chime
in.
Moose has more of the Desktop GIS functionality and more tightly
integrated with MapServer. For exa
Paul,
It's funny you put it the way you did. From an Email exchange today
about how our project compares ti OpenLayers :
This is how I see them as being different. Others, feel free to chime
in.
Moose has more of the Desktop GIS functionality and more tightly
integrated with MapServer. For exa
Hi Bob,
this was recently discussed in the incubation committee. It was
agreed by all that OSGeo is only officially interested in incubating/
hosting reasonably mature projects that have an established code base
and user community. It was explicitly decided that OSGeo is not the
breeding
All,
I'm wondering about finding a new home for a Mapping Client Project.
What requirements are there for proposing a new project under the OSGEO
Umbrella?
I can set up a Physical home for it, but was wondering more about having
OSGEO handling the Project Ownership in some form. Or is it bette
14 matches
Mail list logo
