Maestro and compatibility with previous mapguide versions.
|
|
Jackie Ng
|
Hi All,
This is mainly for Kenneth to answer, How much emphasis is placed on Maestro being compatible with previous versions of mapguide, especially wrt to implementing new features? - Jackie |
||||||||||||||||
Kenneth Skovhede, GEOGRAF A/S
|
In percent ? :D
Generally I would like Maestro to be compatible with all versions of MapGuide. But versions older than 1.2 are not supported, and once 2.1 comes out, I think 1.2 support could be deprecated. And by deprecated I mean, just not accept tickets fixing issues with that version. The MaestroAPI has a ServerVersion property, so it should be possible to perform special actions with certain versions of MapGuide. So far, MapGuide has not broken any backwards compatibility, so when implementing a new feature everything else should work fine anyway. I only have access to a few versions of MapGuide, so I generally only test with the most recent release (2.1 atm). Regards, Kenneth Skovhede, GEOGRAF A/S Jackie Ng skrev: > Hi All, > > This is mainly for Kenneth to answer, > > How much emphasis is placed on Maestro being compatible with previous > versions of mapguide, especially wrt to implementing new features? > > - Jackie > > mapguide-internals mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapguide-internals |
||||||||||||||||
Gabriele Monfardini
|
> Generally I would like Maestro to be compatible with all versions of
> MapGuide. Great. > But versions older than 1.2 are not supported, and once 2.1 comes out, > I think 1.2 support could be deprecated. > And by deprecated I mean, just not accept tickets fixing issues with that > version. Please continue supporting version 1.2 if it's possible (and not too much work). Some people is still using 1.2 due to some problem with 2.x (eg. horrible compilation problem under GNU/Linux or problems with new Postgis provider). And Maestro is a great tool to work with. > So far, MapGuide has not broken any backwards compatibility, so > when implementing a new feature everything else should work fine anyway. > > I only have access to a few versions of MapGuide, so I generally only test > with the most recent release (2.1 atm). Well, obviously this is fine. Until now 2.x API is largely the same as 1.2 so no problems at all. Thank you for your work Gabriele _______________________________________________ mapguide-internals mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapguide-internals |
||||||||||||||||
|
Jackie Ng
|
The flipside to that is that the need to support 1.2 may hinder certain enhancements from being implemented. Which is why I raised the original question.
- Jackie
|
||||
zspitzer
|
it would be good to have some sort of register of users by version n api...
On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 9:41 PM, Jackie Ng<[hidden email]> wrote: > > The flipside to that is that the need to support 1.2 may hinder certain > enhancements from being implemented. Which is why I raised the original > question. > > - Jackie > > > Gabriele Monfardini wrote: >> >>> Generally I would like Maestro to be compatible with all versions of >>> MapGuide. >> >> Great. >> >>> But versions older than 1.2 are not supported, and once 2.1 comes out, >>> I think 1.2 support could be deprecated. >>> And by deprecated I mean, just not accept tickets fixing issues with that >>> version. >> Please continue supporting version 1.2 if it's possible (and not too much >> work). >> >> Some people is still using 1.2 due to some problem with 2.x (eg. >> horrible compilation problem under GNU/Linux or problems with new >> Postgis provider). >> And Maestro is a great tool to work with. >> >> >>> So far, MapGuide has not broken any backwards compatibility, so >>> when implementing a new feature everything else should work fine anyway. >>> >>> I only have access to a few versions of MapGuide, so I generally only >>> test >>> with the most recent release (2.1 atm). >> >> Well, obviously this is fine. >> Until now 2.x API is largely the same as 1.2 so no problems at all. >> Thank you for your work >> >> Gabriele >> _______________________________________________ >> mapguide-internals mailing list >> [hidden email] >> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapguide-internals >> >> > > -- > View this message in context: http://n2.nabble.com/Maestro-and-compatibility-with-previous-mapguide-versions.-tp3307965p3309041.html > Sent from the MapGuide Internals mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > _______________________________________________ > mapguide-internals mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapguide-internals > -- Zac Spitzer - http://zacster.blogspot.com +61 405 847 168 _______________________________________________ mapguide-internals mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapguide-internals |
||||||||||||||||
Trevor Wekel
|
Hey guys,
I was just looking at MapGuide subversion vault and it seems as though Maestro only has a single stream under http://svn.osgeo.org/mapguide/trunk/Tools/Maestro. Is the intent to always have Maestro trunk support all releases of MapGuide? This would currently include 1.2, 2.0, and 2.1 and likely 2.2 next year. This will make coding and validation for new releases more complicated due to the "all releases supported" constraint. Next year's Maestro will have to be coded to ensure that 1.2, 2.0, 2.1, and 2.2 work. In addition, Maestro will have to be testing against all of these versions of MapGuide on both Windows and Linux. That's eight different combinations to validate. It might be simpler from a coding and testing perspective if Maestro used a branch strategy similar to the one used for MapGuide. In other words, Maestro could have a separate branch for 1.2, 2.0, 2.1 and 2.2. Previous releases (1.2, 2.0) would only receive critical bug fixes and the most current release would get all the new features. Since there are different versions of Maestro available, 100% backward compatibility is no longer a requirement. Users could just install the version(s) of Maestro they required. In addition, development and testing should be easier because Maestro would only be targeting a specific release of MapGuide. Any thoughts? Thanks, Trevor -----Original Message----- From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Zac Spitzer Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2009 6:23 AM To: MapGuide Internals Mail List Subject: Re: [mapguide-internals] Maestro and compatibility with previous mapguide versions. it would be good to have some sort of register of users by version n api... On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 9:41 PM, Jackie Ng<[hidden email]> wrote: > > The flipside to that is that the need to support 1.2 may hinder certain > enhancements from being implemented. Which is why I raised the original > question. > > - Jackie > > > Gabriele Monfardini wrote: >> >>> Generally I would like Maestro to be compatible with all versions of >>> MapGuide. >> >> Great. >> >>> But versions older than 1.2 are not supported, and once 2.1 comes out, >>> I think 1.2 support could be deprecated. >>> And by deprecated I mean, just not accept tickets fixing issues with that >>> version. >> Please continue supporting version 1.2 if it's possible (and not too much >> work). >> >> Some people is still using 1.2 due to some problem with 2.x (eg. >> horrible compilation problem under GNU/Linux or problems with new >> Postgis provider). >> And Maestro is a great tool to work with. >> >> >>> So far, MapGuide has not broken any backwards compatibility, so >>> when implementing a new feature everything else should work fine anyway. >>> >>> I only have access to a few versions of MapGuide, so I generally only >>> test >>> with the most recent release (2.1 atm). >> >> Well, obviously this is fine. >> Until now 2.x API is largely the same as 1.2 so no problems at all. >> Thank you for your work >> >> Gabriele >> _______________________________________________ >> mapguide-internals mailing list >> [hidden email] >> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapguide-internals >> >> > > -- > View this message in context: http://n2.nabble.com/Maestro-and-compatibility-with-previous-mapguide-versions.-tp3307965p3309041.html > Sent from the MapGuide Internals mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > _______________________________________________ > mapguide-internals mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapguide-internals > -- Zac Spitzer - http://zacster.blogspot.com +61 405 847 168 _______________________________________________ mapguide-internals mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapguide-internals _______________________________________________ mapguide-internals mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapguide-internals |
||||||||||||||||
Jason Birch
|
In reply to this post
by Jackie Ng
I'd be hesitant to see maestro in lock-step with mapguide. I think that once Kenneth gets to a 1.0 release that it should be branched/tagged, and that version support should be explicit on the download page, but I'd hate to see a hard and fast 1:1 relationship between maestro and MapGuide if it can be helped. I like how Haris is supporting multiple fdo api versions of his oracle provider so users aren't forced to upgrade to get fixes, etc.
----- Original Message ----- From: [hidden email] <[hidden email]> To: MapGuide Internals Mail List <[hidden email]> Sent: Thu Jul 23 12:21:17 2009 Subject: RE: [mapguide-internals] Maestro and compatibility with previous mapguide versions. Hey guys, I was just looking at MapGuide subversion vault and it seems as though Maestro only has a single stream under http://svn.osgeo.org/mapguide/trunk/Tools/Maestro. Is the intent to always have Maestro trunk support all releases of MapGuide? This would currently include 1.2, 2.0, and 2.1 and likely 2.2 next year. This will make coding and validation for new releases more complicated due to the "all releases supported" constraint. Next year's Maestro will have to be coded to ensure that 1.2, 2.0, 2.1, and 2.2 work. In addition, Maestro will have to be testing against all of these versions of MapGuide on both Windows and Linux. That's eight different combinations to validate. It might be simpler from a coding and testing perspective if Maestro used a branch strategy similar to the one used for MapGuide. In other words, Maestro could have a separate branch for 1.2, 2.0, 2.1 and 2.2. Previous releases (1.2, 2.0) would only receive critical bug fixes and the most current release would get all the new features. Since there are different versions of Maestro available, 100% backward compatibility is no longer a requirement. Users could just install the version(s) of Maestro they required. In addition, development and testing should be easier because Maestro would only be targeting a specific release of MapGuide. Any thoughts? Thanks, Trevor -----Original Message----- From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Zac Spitzer Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2009 6:23 AM To: MapGuide Internals Mail List Subject: Re: [mapguide-internals] Maestro and compatibility with previous mapguide versions. it would be good to have some sort of register of users by version n api... On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 9:41 PM, Jackie Ng<[hidden email]> wrote: > > The flipside to that is that the need to support 1.2 may hinder certain > enhancements from being implemented. Which is why I raised the original > question. > > - Jackie > > > Gabriele Monfardini wrote: >> >>> Generally I would like Maestro to be compatible with all versions of >>> MapGuide. >> >> Great. >> >>> But versions older than 1.2 are not supported, and once 2.1 comes out, >>> I think 1.2 support could be deprecated. >>> And by deprecated I mean, just not accept tickets fixing issues with that >>> version. >> Please continue supporting version 1.2 if it's possible (and not too much >> work). >> >> Some people is still using 1.2 due to some problem with 2.x (eg. >> horrible compilation problem under GNU/Linux or problems with new >> Postgis provider). >> And Maestro is a great tool to work with. >> >> >>> So far, MapGuide has not broken any backwards compatibility, so >>> when implementing a new feature everything else should work fine anyway. >>> >>> I only have access to a few versions of MapGuide, so I generally only >>> test >>> with the most recent release (2.1 atm). >> >> Well, obviously this is fine. >> Until now 2.x API is largely the same as 1.2 so no problems at all. >> Thank you for your work >> >> Gabriele >> _______________________________________________ >> mapguide-internals mailing list >> [hidden email] >> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapguide-internals >> >> > > -- > View this message in context: http://n2.nabble.com/Maestro-and-compatibility-with-previous-mapguide-versions.-tp3307965p3309041.html > Sent from the MapGuide Internals mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > _______________________________________________ > mapguide-internals mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapguide-internals > -- Zac Spitzer - http://zacster.blogspot.com +61 405 847 168 _______________________________________________ mapguide-internals mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapguide-internals _______________________________________________ mapguide-internals mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapguide-internals _______________________________________________ mapguide-internals mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapguide-internals |
||||||||||||||||
|
Trevor Wekel
|
That's fair. I was just trying to avoid the potential of a spaghetti code situation by trying to support too many versions of MapGuide in a single executable. For the most part, I suspect the new features would just be "greyed out" if the MapGuide version is too low. But I am curious about changes to schema (map definition, layer definition, etc.). These changes could have an impact on the Maestro UI.
Perhaps it's not such a big deal. Thanks, Trevor -----Original Message----- From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Jason Birch Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2009 1:33 PM To: '[hidden email]' Subject: Re: [mapguide-internals] Maestro and compatibility with previous mapguide versions. I'd be hesitant to see maestro in lock-step with mapguide. I think that once Kenneth gets to a 1.0 release that it should be branched/tagged, and that version support should be explicit on the download page, but I'd hate to see a hard and fast 1:1 relationship between maestro and MapGuide if it can be helped. I like how Haris is supporting multiple fdo api versions of his oracle provider so users aren't forced to upgrade to get fixes, etc. ----- Original Message ----- From: [hidden email] <[hidden email]> To: MapGuide Internals Mail List <[hidden email]> Sent: Thu Jul 23 12:21:17 2009 Subject: RE: [mapguide-internals] Maestro and compatibility with previous mapguide versions. Hey guys, I was just looking at MapGuide subversion vault and it seems as though Maestro only has a single stream under http://svn.osgeo.org/mapguide/trunk/Tools/Maestro. Is the intent to always have Maestro trunk support all releases of MapGuide? This would currently include 1.2, 2.0, and 2.1 and likely 2.2 next year. This will make coding and validation for new releases more complicated due to the "all releases supported" constraint. Next year's Maestro will have to be coded to ensure that 1.2, 2.0, 2.1, and 2.2 work. In addition, Maestro will have to be testing against all of these versions of MapGuide on both Windows and Linux. That's eight different combinations to validate. It might be simpler from a coding and testing perspective if Maestro used a branch strategy similar to the one used for MapGuide. In other words, Maestro could have a separate branch for 1.2, 2.0, 2.1 and 2.2. Previous releases (1.2, 2.0) would only receive critical bug fixes and the most current release would get all the new features. Since there are different versions of Maestro available, 100% backward compatibility is no longer a requirement. Users could just install the version(s) of Maestro they required. In addition, development and testing should be easier because Maestro would only be targeting a specific release of MapGuide. Any thoughts? Thanks, Trevor -----Original Message----- From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Zac Spitzer Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2009 6:23 AM To: MapGuide Internals Mail List Subject: Re: [mapguide-internals] Maestro and compatibility with previous mapguide versions. it would be good to have some sort of register of users by version n api... On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 9:41 PM, Jackie Ng<[hidden email]> wrote: > > The flipside to that is that the need to support 1.2 may hinder > certain enhancements from being implemented. Which is why I raised the > original question. > > - Jackie > > > Gabriele Monfardini wrote: >> >>> Generally I would like Maestro to be compatible with all versions of >>> MapGuide. >> >> Great. >> >>> But versions older than 1.2 are not supported, and once 2.1 comes >>> out, I think 1.2 support could be deprecated. >>> And by deprecated I mean, just not accept tickets fixing issues with >>> that version. >> Please continue supporting version 1.2 if it's possible (and not too >> much work). >> >> Some people is still using 1.2 due to some problem with 2.x (eg. >> horrible compilation problem under GNU/Linux or problems with new >> Postgis provider). >> And Maestro is a great tool to work with. >> >> >>> So far, MapGuide has not broken any backwards compatibility, so when >>> implementing a new feature everything else should work fine anyway. >>> >>> I only have access to a few versions of MapGuide, so I generally >>> only test with the most recent release (2.1 atm). >> >> Well, obviously this is fine. >> Until now 2.x API is largely the same as 1.2 so no problems at all. >> Thank you for your work >> >> Gabriele >> _______________________________________________ >> mapguide-internals mailing list >> [hidden email] >> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapguide-internals >> >> > > -- > View this message in context: > http://n2.nabble.com/Maestro-and-compatibility-with-previous-mapguide- > versions.-tp3307965p3309041.html Sent from the MapGuide Internals > mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > _______________________________________________ > mapguide-internals mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapguide-internals > -- Zac Spitzer - http://zacster.blogspot.com +61 405 847 168 _______________________________________________ mapguide-internals mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapguide-internals _______________________________________________ mapguide-internals mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapguide-internals _______________________________________________ mapguide-internals mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapguide-internals |
||||||||||||||||
|
Kenneth Skovhede, GEOGRAF A/S
|
I have not yet had to make such a decision.
I have a pending change to support the "DisplayInLegend" part of LayerDefinition-1.3.0. I plan to support the feature in all versions of the LayerDefinition. So the userinterface does not change, but obviously the feature does not work with older versions. I am able to store the data using the ExtendedData attributes as suggested by Walt. The spaghetti code is limited to the part that reads the property, as it needs to look in two places. I have no way of testing against multiple versions of MapGuide. I usually test my changes only against the local version of MapGuide that I have. I have not yet seen an issue that was specific to a certain version of MapGuide. For the next big release of Maestro, I plan to have a brief period of beta testing, and I hope the users will test Maestro on various versions of MapGuide. I understand that there are still 1.2 users. As for the trunk issue, I plan to tag releases that are not just revision builds. That way users have easy access to older releases, should a certain feature break something. As I am currently the only developer on Maestro, I just commit my changes to trunk. If a situation arises where there are multiple developers, I will make branches and restrict commits to single tickets. Regards, Kenneth Skovhede, GEOGRAF A/S Trevor Wekel skrev: > That's fair. I was just trying to avoid the potential of a spaghetti code situation by trying to support too many versions of MapGuide in a single executable. For the most part, I suspect the new features would just be "greyed out" if the MapGuide version is too low. But I am curious about changes to schema (map definition, layer definition, etc.). These changes could have an impact on the Maestro UI. > > Perhaps it's not such a big deal. > > Thanks, > Trevor > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Jason Birch > Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2009 1:33 PM > To: '[hidden email]' > Subject: Re: [mapguide-internals] Maestro and compatibility with previous mapguide versions. > > I'd be hesitant to see maestro in lock-step with mapguide. I think that once Kenneth gets to a 1.0 release that it should be branched/tagged, and that version support should be explicit on the download page, but I'd hate to see a hard and fast 1:1 relationship between maestro and MapGuide if it can be helped. I like how Haris is supporting multiple fdo api versions of his oracle provider so users aren't forced to upgrade to get fixes, etc. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: [hidden email] <[hidden email]> > To: MapGuide Internals Mail List <[hidden email]> > Sent: Thu Jul 23 12:21:17 2009 > Subject: RE: [mapguide-internals] Maestro and compatibility with previous mapguide versions. > > Hey guys, > > I was just looking at MapGuide subversion vault and it seems as though Maestro only has a single stream under http://svn.osgeo.org/mapguide/trunk/Tools/Maestro. Is the intent to always have Maestro trunk support all releases of MapGuide? This would currently include 1.2, 2.0, and 2.1 and likely 2.2 next year. > > This will make coding and validation for new releases more complicated due to the "all releases supported" constraint. Next year's Maestro will have to be coded to ensure that 1.2, 2.0, 2.1, and 2.2 work. In addition, Maestro will have to be testing against all of these versions of MapGuide on both Windows and Linux. That's eight different combinations to validate. > > It might be simpler from a coding and testing perspective if Maestro used a branch strategy similar to the one used for MapGuide. In other words, Maestro could have a separate branch for 1.2, 2.0, 2.1 and 2.2. Previous releases (1.2, 2.0) would only receive critical bug fixes and the most current release would get all the new features. Since there are different versions of Maestro available, 100% backward compatibility is no longer a requirement. Users could just install the version(s) of Maestro they required. In addition, development and testing should be easier because Maestro would only be targeting a specific release of MapGuide. > > Any thoughts? > > > Thanks, > Trevor > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Zac Spitzer > Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2009 6:23 AM > To: MapGuide Internals Mail List > Subject: Re: [mapguide-internals] Maestro and compatibility with previous mapguide versions. > > it would be good to have some sort of register of users by version n api... > > On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 9:41 PM, Jackie Ng<[hidden email]> wrote: > >> The flipside to that is that the need to support 1.2 may hinder >> certain enhancements from being implemented. Which is why I raised the >> original question. >> >> - Jackie >> >> >> Gabriele Monfardini wrote: >> >>>> Generally I would like Maestro to be compatible with all versions of >>>> MapGuide. >>>> >>> Great. >>> >>> >>>> But versions older than 1.2 are not supported, and once 2.1 comes >>>> out, I think 1.2 support could be deprecated. >>>> And by deprecated I mean, just not accept tickets fixing issues with >>>> that version. >>>> >>> Please continue supporting version 1.2 if it's possible (and not too >>> much work). >>> >>> Some people is still using 1.2 due to some problem with 2.x (eg. >>> horrible compilation problem under GNU/Linux or problems with new >>> Postgis provider). >>> And Maestro is a great tool to work with. >>> >>> >>> >>>> So far, MapGuide has not broken any backwards compatibility, so when >>>> implementing a new feature everything else should work fine anyway. >>>> >>>> I only have access to a few versions of MapGuide, so I generally >>>> only test with the most recent release (2.1 atm). >>>> >>> Well, obviously this is fine. >>> Until now 2.x API is largely the same as 1.2 so no problems at all. >>> Thank you for your work >>> >>> Gabriele >>> _______________________________________________ >>> mapguide-internals mailing list >>> [hidden email] >>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapguide-internals >>> >>> >>> >> -- >> View this message in context: >> http://n2.nabble.com/Maestro-and-compatibility-with-previous-mapguide- >> versions.-tp3307965p3309041.html Sent from the MapGuide Internals >> mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >> _______________________________________________ >> mapguide-internals mailing list >> [hidden email] >> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapguide-internals >> >> > > > > -- > Zac Spitzer - > http://zacster.blogspot.com > +61 405 847 168 > _______________________________________________ > mapguide-internals mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapguide-internals > > > _______________________________________________ > mapguide-internals mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapguide-internals > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > mapguide-internals mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapguide-internals > mapguide-internals mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapguide-internals |
||||||||||||||||
| Free Embeddable Forum Powered by Nabble | Help |
