On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 1:45 AM, Jody Garnett wrote:
> Andrea do you have a blog post on the ft-transform, or NetCDF/ Coverage
> API work that I can link to?
>
Hmm... nope, I don't at the moment
Cheers
Andrea
--
==
Our support, Your Success! Visit http://opensdi.geo-solutions.it for more
inf
Old pull requests also undermine branch hygiene. Is an old pull request
for master changed to a pull request for a stable branch when we make a
new stable? I don't think so. Misinterpreted pull requests might end up
merging across branches. Furthermore, single-use pull request branches
should b
Andrea Said:
| Maybe we should link the pull request from the associated jira
ticket, and then close the pull, so that others might take over later?
I agree with this sentiment.
Some of my random thoughts regarding pull requests:
Pull request are intimately tied to the code base. That
Well open source is supposed to be fun!
--
Jody Garnett
On Monday, 22 July 2013 at 9:45 AM, Brett Walker wrote:
> I just cannot stop thinking that someone is having a laugh at our expense.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Happy_Fun_Ball
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7gzDC-2ZO8I
>
> B
Niels,
how much of the proposed API changes made it into gt-complex and
gt-main? And the builders? Some of these changes were originally
destined for gt-wfs-ng, so perhaps Gabriel can comment.
Kind regards,
Ben.
On 21/07/13 20:53, Jody Garnett wrote:
> I am sifting through the various proposal
On 21/07/13 18:17, Andrea Aime wrote:
> Yep, that's the whole point of this thread, find some shared agreement
> on how we should act
> on stale pull requests.
And I think we have an agenda item for today's committee meeting.
--
Ben Caradoc-Davies
Software Engineer
CSIRO Earth Science and Resou
I just cannot stop thinking that someone is having a laugh at our expense.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Happy_Fun_Ball
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7gzDC-2ZO8I
Brett
From: Brett Walker
Sent: Sunday, 21 July 2013 12:10 PM
To: Jody Garnett
Cc: GeoTools Dev
Subject: Re: [Geotools-devel] happy fu
Andrea do you have a blog post on the ft-transform, or NetCDF/ Coverage API
work that I can link to?
(I also note I am mixing up the format so we have an about 10.x series which
can collect the change proposals and blog posts associated with the release)
--
Jody Garnett
On Monday, 22 July 2
On Sun, Jul 21, 2013 at 3:13 PM, Jody Garnett wrote:
> I have put a draft blog post up, ready for review. I am sure I have not
> captured all the work that went into this release, please reply if you
> notice something I have missed.
>
Added notes for the gt-transform graduation.
Not sure, but I
I have put a draft blog post up, ready for review. I am sure I have not
captured all the work that went into this release, please reply if you notice
something I have missed.
--
Jody Garnett
On Sunday, 21 July 2013 at 2:42 AM, Jody Garnett wrote:
> A couple of glitches when checking over
I am sifting through the various proposals and pull requests trying to sort out
what our new features are for 10-beta.
And have found one here that is stalled out:
- http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/GEOT-4147
-
http://docs.codehaus.org/display/GEOTOOLS/ComplexFeature+Parsing+and+Building+Support
On Sun, Jul 21, 2013 at 12:00 PM, Michael Bedward wrote:
> No, I don't think there's any irritation Brett, or any implication
> that you were not being helpful. It's just highlighted something that
> probably needs to be discussed and formalized a bit.
>
Yep, that's the whole point of this threa
No, I don't think there's any irritation Brett, or any implication
that you were not being helpful. It's just highlighted something that
probably needs to be discussed and formalized a bit.
Michael
On 21 July 2013 19:25, Brett Walker wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm sorry if this has irritated people.
>
>
Hi,
I'm sorry if this has irritated people.
The creator of the pull request had not responded to your constructive comments
for some time. (There were incompatible API changes and no unit tests.) If the
changes were important enough to the contributor then I would have felt that a
faster respo
Just my 2c, but I thought it might not have been the best thing to
close that pull request. I can easily imagine submitting a PR,
getting feedback about the need for further work from the core devs,
and then not getting round to it for a few months (or years !) because
of other things. I don't th
Hi,
this morning I've noticed that a couple of pull requests were closed due to
"5 months of inactivity" https://github.com/geotools/geotools/pull/120
At first I thought it was the original author pissed because I did not have
a look at the pull request for such a long time, but then I've noticed t
16 matches
Mail list logo
