Weekly IRC meeting 15 Sept. 2008:

  1. What is up
  2. Meeting time
  3. GeoAPI version for Gt 2.5
  4. GeoTools 2.2.4
  5. volunteer for osgeo meeting
  6. 2.5.0 and mvn assembly

Action items:

  • meeting time remains as documented here 3.1 Internet Relay Chat in the developers guide
  • the 2.5.x branch will be making use of the GeoAPI 2.2-M2 tag for the duration
  • Jody Garnett should release 2.2.4 this week when moovida has given the go ahead
  • Justin Deoliveira has volunteered to represent GeoTools at the annual OSGeo meeting
  • Gabriel Roldán is waiting on GeoServer acceptance tests prior to releasing 2.5.0; we are stuck on the use of mvn assembly target and may fall back to an earlier "jar collector" solution.

jgarnett: morning

aaime cannot find the official meeting time in confluence

jgarnett: I think it was 17 mins ago; sorry I am late
jgarnett: oh apparently it is in 10 mins
jgarnett: see http://docs.codehaus.org/display/GEOT/3.1+Internet+Relay+Chat
jgarnett: I will send a reminder email to the list now.
aaime: damn, no wonder I did not find it, I kept on looking for IRC
aaime: not for the expanded version
jgarnett: I jumped to the section on communication and found it that way.
jgarnett: Good morning Andrea; thanks for fixing the streaming renderer bug last week.
aaime: np
Eclesia: (hi all)
jgarnett: Hi Eclesia; got your email.
jgarnett: I hope the comments about OSGi on the mailing list are clear; the changes being described are all to the MANIFEST.MF file; and do not effect anyone using the jar as normal.
jgarnett: I am not going to worry about it much until there is a solid proposal to look at; since I do not personally know what lines need to be added to the MANIFEST.MF; but it sounds like this is something Maven can handle for us.
axelfrancois_ left the room (quit: Remote closed the connection).
acuster: the changes sound like they could be useful
Eclesia: ok, then I will see how NetBeans RCP will handle it.
acuster has changed the topic to: Weekly IRC meeting 15 Sept. 2008: 0) What is up 1) Meeting time 2) GeoAPI version for Gt 2.5
jgarnett: well I hope Mr. Wellmann will make things more clear.
jgarnett: But yeah; I am sure the normal java classloader ignores things in the MANIFEST.MF that it does not understand
jgarnett: I have used a subset of GeoTools in this manner before
jgarnett: a couple minuets before the meeting; looks like we already have agenda items ...
jgarnett has changed the topic to: Weekly IRC meeting 15 Sept. 2008: 0) What is up 1) Meeting time 2) GeoAPI version for Gt 2.5 3) GeoTools 2.2.4
jgarnett: you return ...
jgarnett: okay meeting time; let us round up agenda topics...
jgarnett: I trust that everyone is busy getting ready for FOSS4G - so todays turn out is pretty good.
jgarnett: 0) what is up
jgarnett: jgarnett - I am releasing 2.2.4 this week (or at least tagging it - I will need to dig to come up with the right build environment), I am also working on a fork of 2.5.x for a customer (thanks to those who helped me check out a specific revision last week)
groldan n=groldan@186.12.14.67 entered the room.
arneke n=ak@64.90.184.79.static.nyinternet.net entered the room.

jdeolive is preparing for foss4g... putting together workshop / lab materials

simboss: simboss- refactor geotiff and geojp2

aaime has been working on the new Oracle data store, and now it's trying to get some more juice out of gt2/gs

acuster: acuster---babysitting,isogeometry,documentation

groldan is working on WMS for nd coverages, namely fixing describelayer to handle coverages at all

Eclesia cleaning code

desruisseaux: Martin: geotidy
jgarnett has changed the topic to: Weekly IRC meeting 15 Sept. 2008: 0) What is up 1) Meeting time 2) GeoAPI version for Gt 2.5 3) GeoTools 2.2.4 4) volunteer for osgeo meeting
jgarnett: fun stuff all around.
jgarnett: 1) meeting time
jgarnett: We have the official meeting time marked down here:
jgarnett: - http://docs.codehaus.org/display/GEOT/3.1+Internet+Relay+Chat
jgarnett: but it has been less than a month since this was changed; so there is still some confusion each week.
jgarnett: I hope this current timeslot is more suitable to those in Europe?
KevinIPS_ n=KevinIPs@97-116-20-214.mpls.qwest.net entered the room.
aaime: very much
desruisseaux: Good for me
acuster: okay for me
jgarnett: I suspect that this topic was on the agenda - simply because it was hard to track down the above link?
acuster: no, because people showed up early
acuster: that hasn't happened in years
acuster: so clearly something was up
aaime: ha ha ha ha
jgarnett: cool - anything else to be said on this one?

acuster: nope
jgarnett: (I do want to keep starting the meetings on time - so we can schedule our lives a bit more reliably)
jgarnett: 2) GeoAPI version for GeoTools 2.5.3
acuster: I'm starting to eye changes to GeoAPI; for those changes to happen I'd like to know what their impact will be on geotools
jgarnett: adrian I tried to answer this via email; I did make a formal GeoAPI tag for the 2.5.x branch when it started.
jgarnett: so you should be good to go; but you are free to check my work.
acuster: right, can I assume that the branch will use that tag for ever more?
aaime: I believe you're willing to change geoapi geometry no?
acuster: ?
acuster: I am filing bugs against geoapi only
aaime: the changes, will they be in the geoapi geometry interfaces?
jgarnett: acuster you are correct; that tag will be used for 2.5.x
acuster: yes, the changes will be in the geoapi geometry interfaces
acuster: on trunk/ I will either fix the geometry module or let it die a slow death
aaime: I believe they are not a problem, not even in trunk... nothing is actually using them besides the geom unsupported modules, right?
acuster: right
acuster: okay, that's that topic
jgarnett: cool
oterral123 left the room.
jgarnett: acuster if it would hep you feel better; we may be able to strip geometry out of the 2.5.x series?
aaime: acuster, I see no issues from the GeoServer point of view
jgarnett: then you would feel more comfortable making the geometry APIs not suck.
acuster: jgarnett, not out of 2.5
jgarnett: okay; just checking.
acuster: that can stay since it has an appropriate geoapi
cbriancon left the room (quit: "Leaving.").
acuster: I don't care what happens to that
acuster: on trunk I'll negotiate with you when I have a better sense what is needed
jgarnett: good good
jgarnett: I have no current project making use of geometry interfaces; I only care that they are clear
jgarnett: 4) volunteer for osgeo meeting
grolda1 n=groldan@170.51.170.198 entered the room.
jgarnett: At FOSS4G they are going to have some kind of meeting
jgarnett: I spoke at the one last year
acuster: hmm (3)
groldan left the room (quit: Nick collision from services.).
jgarnett: oops?
grolda1 is now known as groldan
jgarnett: 3) GeoTools 2.2.4
jgarnett: I think I can finally tag 2.2.4; I am waiting for the go ahead from Moovida; and then I can tag (and deploy / release)
jgarnett: any questions on this one? Other than horror that it is still around and active?
aaime: horror? no, actually funny
aaime: (and no, of course no issue there)
jgarnett: must only be a horror for me then (smile)
jgarnett: 4) volunteer for osgeo meeting
jgarnett: let me try it again
jgarnett: There is a yearly OSGeo meeting; taking place at FOSS4G (or before?)
jgarnett: As an official project now we need someone to crash the meeting and give a status update. Last year I was only able to say we were still inccubation (which got a round of laughter)
jgarnett: this year we actually have progress to report.
jdeolive: aaime or myself can probably do that
jgarnett: I am not sure who exactly is going to FOSS4G this year; but I would like to request a volunteer.

jdeolive is not sure who else will be there...

aaime: Jesse will be
jgarnett: It should be someone from the PMC if we can possibly manage it; it is supposed to be my responsibility but I am not on site.
jdeolive: is jesse on the psc?
jdeolive: i am fine with taking that on
jdeolive: can you possibly provide a hit list of things to touch on jgarnett
jgarnett: thinking
jgarnett: - we graduated
jgarnett: - 2.5.0 should be the first official release with 0SGeo (c)
jgarnett: (I would like to to actually exist by foss4g - but have not seen it come up in the agenda)
jgarnett: that is about it.
jdeolive: jgarnett: hopefully it will... we still want to get gs 1.7.0 out by foss4g
jgarnett: good good
jdeolive: although... i admit, its looking dim
jgarnett: hrm; so that means you may call a code freeze on 2.5.x near the end of the week?
jdeolive: depends on how much progress we make on the geoserver side of things
jgarnett: gabriel did we ever make progress on the maven assembly target?
jdeolive: afaik gt is all ready to go is it not?
groldan: nop

jdeolive waits for groldans report

jgarnett: gabriel should we grab another agenda item for this?
groldan: so far I didn't found a way for assembly not to package everything, and didn't get back to it neither
jgarnett has changed the topic to: Weekly IRC meeting 15 Sept. 2008: 0) What is up 1) Meeting time 2) GeoAPI version for Gt 2.5 3) GeoTools 2.2.4 4) volunteer for osgeo meeting 5) 2.5.0 and mvn assembly
jgarnett: martin; were we ever able to explain the difficult to you? Perhaps it is something you could advise us on?
groldan: we could but I'm not sure what else could be said about it other than someone should investigate deeper on how to configure the assembly plugin or what command to run etc
afrancois n=afrancoi@AMarseille-251-1-90-95.w86-202.abo.wanadoo.fr entered the room.
acuster: is that the only thing stopping a final 2.5 release?
jgarnett: from the geotools side yes
jgarnett: I think geoserver is still doing some acceptance testing on there end
groldan: something I could do if I get assigned to do the release, btw, but so far I didn't have the opportunity to get back to the issue
jgarnett: but that can show up as a "dot" release if needed.
desruisseaux: I tried assembly plugin a bit, but I ended up using the custom "jar-collector" stull instead (I didn't found at that time how to configure the assembly plugin exactly like I wanted - but maybe it is more configurable today).
jgarnett: the problem acuster is that; even with me using profiles to stip all the "unsupported" modules from the build; mvn assembly will still package them all up into a single archive.
desruisseaux: (typo: stull --> stuff)
jgarnett: perhaps jar-collector could last another round?
jgarnett: I think gabriel even tried not building them; and they got pulled down from the maven repository and assembled.
desruisseaux: I'm neutral on that.
groldan: right
groldan: even with a clean local repo it got them from the refractions one
jgarnett: I just wonder how it did that; ie how did it know the list of "child" modules to assemble up?
groldan: dunno
groldan: since it was after the deploy -Dall
jgarnett: if you do not have the -Dall set; will it package up what we want?
KevinIPS left the room (quit: No route to host).
jgarnett: okay well I think this is going to wrap up the meeting
jgarnett: Gabriel; if you do get the go ahead to make the 2.5.0 release
jgarnett: send email to the list and we can try mvn assembly one more time; or dust of jar collector.
grolda1 is now known as groldan
groldan: sorry my clunky connection again
jgarnett: np
jgarnett: I can post the logs; thanks for the quick meeting everyone.