Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

0) What's up
1) 2.5.0 release
2) JDBC mosaic/pyramid plugin
3) geoapi geometry work

aaime: 0) What's up
***aaime is working on FOSS4G presentations
***jdeolive is preparing for foss4g and releaseing geotools 2.5.0 this week
jgarnett: jgarnett is cursing SLD XML Transform Style Visitor stuff
aaime: anyone else?
***acuster lives through geometry code sprint, trips prep (foss/ogc)
acuster ha scelto come argomento: Meeting: 0) What's up 1) 2.5.0 release 2) JDBC mosaic/pyramid plugin 3) geoapi geometry work
jgarnett: (I am also looking at geoapi stylefactory; but it is not worth a meeting topic)
aaime: Ok, shall we move on?
aaime: 1) 2.5.0 release
jdeolive: i am up
jdeolive: so as i sent email last week i plan to release gt 2.5.0 this week
jgarnett: sounds like you fixed the assembly stuff?
jdeolive: i believe there are no remaining issues... besides the addition of imagemosaic-jdbc to plugin
jdeolive: i did not do anything (smile)
jdeolive: i think aaime was probably right
jdeolive: you just need ot makre sure you have an actual clean codebase
jdeolive: my guess ithat you did a clean
jdeolive: without the unsupported modules which have previously been built
jdeolive: so they got picked up
jdeolive: but who knows
jdeolive: don't look a gift horse in the mouth... that is what i always say (smile)
acuster: did the jdbc graduation also graduate imagepyramid/mosaic?
jgarnett: neigh
jgarnett: I think that is topic 2)
jgarnett: note looking here
jgarnett: (checking over the known issues for OSGeo - and that is the only one that looks interesting)
jgarnett: but perhaps not interesting enough to work on.
jdeolive: ok... but i asked last week and this did not come up
jdeolive: i thought all the ip stuff had been resolved
jgarnett: Have a look at the list here:
jdeolive: again, i sent email to the list and the only blocker was teh assembly issue
jgarnett: the issues are known (which is all we needed for graduation)
jdeolive: i only alotted a certain amount of time for this release
jdeolive: well i guess i have been out of the loop
jgarnett: I do not think this is listed as a blocker justin.
jgarnett: indeed looking at the list there are no blockers.
aaime: groldan comment seems to imply the needed review files have been added?
jgarnett: Justin do you have everything you need to make the release?
jdeolive: yeah, just a confirmation that the imagemosaic-jdbc stuff is ready to go
jdeolive: but it sounds like that is the next topic
aaime: ok, then elt's switch topic
aaime: 2) JDBC mosaic/pyramid plugin
aaime: acuster, to answer your previous question
aaime: the old image mosaic and pyramid plugins have been in "plugins" since long time
aaime: only the jdbc based one, which has a completely different codebase afaik, needed graduation
aaime: anyways, it seems Mueller did satisfay all requirements for graduation, didn't he?
acuster: congrats to christian on the work
acuster: no idea, if Jody is happy...
jgarnett: christian++
acuster: he seems happy
aaime: indeed
jgarnett: he has met testing requirements, documentation requirements and review.atp
aaime: the module has already been moved afaik:
jgarnett: I figure the process is working....
aaime: indeed
acuster: has anyone used it?
aaime: we'll soon have quite a bit of duplication^d^d^d choice (smile)
aaime: not me
jgarnett: only part that was "weak" was it was not obvious that review.atp was a requirement, and the license.txt files were not mentioned very strongly.
aaime: afaik Christian developed it for a customer so someone is supposedly using it in anger
acuster: he's getting paid by google and by a client?
acuster: hmmm
jgarnett: maybe google == client?
jgarnett: or maybe he is going to be richer than me
aaime: dunno about the details
acuster: that would mean that google were using geotools
acuster: which would be news indeed
aaime: he seems to work in a IBM only world
aaime: aix servers and the like
acuster: that seems more likely
acuster: some buisness shop
jgarnett: heh speculation when he is not around to defend himself.
jgarnett: shall we get back to the agenda?
aaime: indeed (smile)
jgarnett: so yeah he is good to go; not sure if we need a vote
jdeolive: so to sum up
jgarnett: (or if the process simply lists requirements?)
jdeolive: the new module is good to go?
aaime: right, that was my question as well
jgarnett: someone want to check the developers guide?
aaime: does graduation need voting? Once all the requirements are satisfied, I guess not?
jgarnett: (if the wiki is even up...)
aaime: "Finally you can ask to be included in the next release, show up at a weekly IRC meeting or send an email to the list. (chances are there will be questions)"
aaime: I believe he asked indeed
acuster: this is the moment where concensus based operations ask if there are any objections, and
acuster: if there are none, the item passes
aaime: I believe there were none in fact
aaime: besides telling him to do the provenance review, which he did, right?
aaime: right:
aaime: I guess this settles it?
aaime: I would have preferred him to show up on a meeting but... he did follow rules and he's pushing for the improvement of gt2 so
aaime: I have nothing to complain about (smile)
aaime: Next topic?
aaime: I guess so
aaime: 3) geoapi geometry work
aaime: acuster was mentioning a "geometry sprint?"
acuster: I'm going to be landing changes to geoapi for the 2.2 release
acuster: moving classes around and renaming methods
aaime: how is this affecting gt2 trunk?
acuster: those changes will break (lightly) the implementations in geotools
acuster: and I doubt I will take the time to fix geotools
acuster: so at that time I'll probably yank jts-wrapper and geometry
acuster: so your builds will keep going
aaime: nice
acuster: anyone who wants to pick up those modules will have a tiny bit of work to get going again
aaime: what about resurrection of them?
aaime: (if any)
acuster: but nothing that their IDE can't help them through
acuster: ?
aaime: like, you're going to change geoapi
aaime: is there going to be any working implementation in GeoTools?
acuster: not sure I understand the question
aaime: well, usually people do change geoapi in order to make a sound implementation possible in gt2
aaime: that happened for features, for sld 1.1
aaime: so I was wondering
aaime: what about geometries
acuster: right, I'm trying to change geoapi to make a sound implementation possible
acuster: sound and sane
aaime: my question is, will you (or someone else) be working on such implementation anytime soon?
acuster: ie if your parent interface and all your child interfaces are in another package
acuster: you should be over there
acuster: I'm working on an iso geometry implemenation yes,
acuster: that's the point of this work
aaime: and will it land in gt2 or is that a separate project?
acuster: on geotidy
acuster: since that will be clean and warning free
aaime: ok
aaime: will you be recoding the vector datastores in geotidy as well?
acuster: who knows?
aaime: or else, what are you planning to use the new geometry package with?
acuster: time will tell where we go from there
aaime: coll
aaime: cool
acuster: it should handle gml
acuster: but we'll need to review the 'new' feature module
jgarnett: gotta go; will check the logs after ...
aaime: I thought you already did last time (smile)
acuster: there's a lot of work yet to go
jgarnett ha abbandonato la stanza (quit: Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)).
acuster: referencing needs love, geometry needs to exist, feature needs love....
acuster: anyhow that's all from my end

  • No labels