RFC 27 for review

[Jackie Ng]

Hi All,

RFC 27 has been posted (http://trac.osgeo.org/fdo/wiki/FDORfc27)

This RFC proposes that the FDO Toolbox project (currently at
http://fdotoolbox.googlecode.com) be migrated to the main FDO repository and
officially be part of the FDO project.

- Jackie
--
View this message in context: http://n2.nabble.com/RFC-27-for-review-tp1343797p1343797.html
Sent from the FDO Internals mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

_______________________________________________
fdo-internals mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/fdo-internals

[Jason Birch]

Can I vote before discussion?  :)

Looks good to me. I'd add a step to the solution to post an item to OSGeo News when the migration is complete.

Jason

P.S.  Trac pages are surprisingly readable on blackberry...


----- Original Message -----
From: [hidden email] <[hidden email]>
To: [hidden email] <[hidden email]>
Sent: Thu Oct 16 20:22:55 2008
Subject: [fdo-internals] RFC 27 for review


Hi All,

RFC 27 has been posted (http://trac.osgeo.org/fdo/wiki/FDORfc27)

This RFC proposes that the FDO Toolbox project (currently at
http://fdotoolbox.googlecode.com) be migrated to the main FDO repository and
officially be part of the FDO project.

- Jackie
--
View this message in context: http://n2.nabble.com/RFC-27-for-review-tp1343797p1343797.html
Sent from the FDO Internals mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

_______________________________________________
fdo-internals mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/fdo-internals

_______________________________________________
fdo-internals mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/fdo-internals

[Orest Halustchak]

Hi,

Jackie, I'm happy that you've posted this rfc to get your FDO Toolbox into the fdo repository. I think it'll be very useful to have these tools and to see more tools added to the toolbox over time.

Thanks,
Orest.

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Jason Birch
Sent: Friday, October 17, 2008 12:05 AM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [fdo-internals] RFC 27 for review

Can I vote before discussion?  :)

Looks good to me. I'd add a step to the solution to post an item to OSGeo News when the migration is complete.

Jason

P.S.  Trac pages are surprisingly readable on blackberry...


----- Original Message -----
From: [hidden email] <[hidden email]>
To: [hidden email] <[hidden email]>
Sent: Thu Oct 16 20:22:55 2008
Subject: [fdo-internals] RFC 27 for review


Hi All,

RFC 27 has been posted (http://trac.osgeo.org/fdo/wiki/FDORfc27)

This RFC proposes that the FDO Toolbox project (currently at
http://fdotoolbox.googlecode.com) be migrated to the main FDO repository and officially be part of the FDO project.

- Jackie
--
View this message in context: http://n2.nabble.com/RFC-27-for-review-tp1343797p1343797.html
Sent from the FDO Internals mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

_______________________________________________
fdo-internals mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/fdo-internals

_______________________________________________
fdo-internals mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/fdo-internals

[Greg Boone]

Agreed.

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Orest Halustchak
Sent: Friday, October 17, 2008 12:31 PM
To: FDO Internals Mail List
Subject: RE: [fdo-internals] RFC 27 for review

Hi,

Jackie, I'm happy that you've posted this rfc to get your FDO Toolbox into the fdo repository. I think it'll be very useful to have these tools and to see more tools added to the toolbox over time.

Thanks,
Orest.

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Jason Birch
Sent: Friday, October 17, 2008 12:05 AM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [fdo-internals] RFC 27 for review

Can I vote before discussion?  :)

Looks good to me. I'd add a step to the solution to post an item to OSGeo News when the migration is complete.

Jason

P.S.  Trac pages are surprisingly readable on blackberry...


----- Original Message -----
From: [hidden email] <[hidden email]>
To: [hidden email] <[hidden email]>
Sent: Thu Oct 16 20:22:55 2008
Subject: [fdo-internals] RFC 27 for review


Hi All,

RFC 27 has been posted (http://trac.osgeo.org/fdo/wiki/FDORfc27)

This RFC proposes that the FDO Toolbox project (currently at
http://fdotoolbox.googlecode.com) be migrated to the main FDO repository and officially be part of the FDO project.

- Jackie
--
View this message in context: http://n2.nabble.com/RFC-27-for-review-tp1343797p1343797.html
Sent from the FDO Internals mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

_______________________________________________
fdo-internals mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/fdo-internals

_______________________________________________
fdo-internals mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/fdo-internals

[Frank Warmerdam]

> Hi All,
>
> RFC 27 has been posted (http://trac.osgeo.org/fdo/wiki/FDORfc27)
>
> This RFC proposes that the FDO Toolbox project (currently at
> http://fdotoolbox.googlecode.com) be migrated to the main FDO repository and
> officially be part of the FDO project.

Jackie,

I'm supportive of this move.

Best regards,
--
---------------------------------------+--------------------------------------
I set the clouds in motion - turn up   | Frank Warmerdam, [hidden email]
light and sound - activate the windows | http://pobox.com/~warmerdam
and watch the world go round - Rush    | Geospatial Programmer for Rent

_______________________________________________
fdo-internals mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/fdo-internals

[Greg Boone]

Jackie. What is your OSGeo username?

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Frank Warmerdam (External)
Sent: Friday, October 17, 2008 2:49 PM
To: FDO Internals Mail List
Subject: Re: [fdo-internals] RFC 27 for review

> Hi All,
>
> RFC 27 has been posted (http://trac.osgeo.org/fdo/wiki/FDORfc27)
>
> This RFC proposes that the FDO Toolbox project (currently at
> http://fdotoolbox.googlecode.com) be migrated to the main FDO repository and
> officially be part of the FDO project.

Jackie,

I'm supportive of this move.

Best regards,
--
---------------------------------------+--------------------------------------
I set the clouds in motion - turn up   | Frank Warmerdam, [hidden email]
light and sound - activate the windows | http://pobox.com/~warmerdam
and watch the world go round - Rush    | Geospatial Programmer for Rent

_______________________________________________
fdo-internals mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/fdo-internals

_______________________________________________
fdo-internals mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/fdo-internals

[Jackie Ng]

If it is what is used on trac, then it is: jng

- Jackie

gregboone wrote:

Jackie. What is your OSGeo username?

-----Original Message-----
From: [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of Frank Warmerdam (External)
Sent: Friday, October 17, 2008 2:49 PM
To: FDO Internals Mail List
Subject: Re: [fdo-internals] RFC 27 for review

> Hi All,
>
> RFC 27 has been posted (http://trac.osgeo.org/fdo/wiki/FDORfc27)
>
> This RFC proposes that the FDO Toolbox project (currently at
> http://fdotoolbox.googlecode.com) be migrated to the main FDO repository and
> officially be part of the FDO project.

Jackie,

I'm supportive of this move.

Best regards,
--
---------------------------------------+--------------------------------------
I set the clouds in motion - turn up   | Frank Warmerdam, [e-mail]
light and sound - activate the windows | http://pobox.com/~warmerdam
and watch the world go round - Rush    | Geospatial Programmer for Rent

_______________________________________________
fdo-internals mailing list
[e-mail]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/fdo-internals

_______________________________________________
fdo-internals mailing list
[e-mail]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/fdo-internals

[Jason Birch]

Given that we've heard from most of the PSC and there has been no
negative feedback, I would like to move to accept RFC 27:

  http://trac.osgeo.org/fdo/wiki/FDORfc27

+1 Jason

-----Original Message-----
From: Jackie Ng
Subject: [fdo-internals] RFC 27 for review

RFC 27 has been posted (http://trac.osgeo.org/fdo/wiki/FDORfc27)

This RFC proposes that the FDO Toolbox project (currently at
http://fdotoolbox.googlecode.com) be migrated to the main FDO repository
and
officially be part of the FDO project.

_______________________________________________
fdo-internals mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/fdo-internals

[Orest Halustchak]

+1, Orest.

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Jason Birch
Sent: Wednesday, October 22, 2008 3:04 PM
To: FDO Internals Mail List
Subject: RE: [fdo-internals] RFC 27 for review

Given that we've heard from most of the PSC and there has been no
negative feedback, I would like to move to accept RFC 27:

  http://trac.osgeo.org/fdo/wiki/FDORfc27

+1 Jason

-----Original Message-----
From: Jackie Ng
Subject: [fdo-internals] RFC 27 for review

RFC 27 has been posted (http://trac.osgeo.org/fdo/wiki/FDORfc27)

This RFC proposes that the FDO Toolbox project (currently at
http://fdotoolbox.googlecode.com) be migrated to the main FDO repository
and
officially be part of the FDO project.

_______________________________________________
fdo-internals mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/fdo-internals
_______________________________________________
fdo-internals mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/fdo-internals

[Frank Warmerdam]

Jason Birch wrote:
> Given that we've heard from most of the PSC and there has been no
> negative feedback, I would like to move to accept RFC 27:
>
>   http://trac.osgeo.org/fdo/wiki/FDORfc27
>

+1 Frank


--
---------------------------------------+--------------------------------------
I set the clouds in motion - turn up   | Frank Warmerdam, [hidden email]
light and sound - activate the windows | http://pobox.com/~warmerdam
and watch the world go round - Rush    | Geospatial Programmer for Rent

_______________________________________________
fdo-internals mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/fdo-internals

[Haris Kurtagic]

+1
Haris

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email]
[mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Jason Birch
Sent: Wednesday, October 22, 2008 9:04 PM
To: FDO Internals Mail List
Subject: RE: [fdo-internals] RFC 27 for review

Given that we've heard from most of the PSC and there has been no
negative feedback, I would like to move to accept RFC 27:

  http://trac.osgeo.org/fdo/wiki/FDORfc27

+1 Jason

-----Original Message-----
From: Jackie Ng
Subject: [fdo-internals] RFC 27 for review

RFC 27 has been posted (http://trac.osgeo.org/fdo/wiki/FDORfc27)

This RFC proposes that the FDO Toolbox project (currently at
http://fdotoolbox.googlecode.com) be migrated to the main FDO repository
and
officially be part of the FDO project.

_______________________________________________
fdo-internals mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/fdo-internals
_______________________________________________
fdo-internals mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/fdo-internals

[Greg Boone]

+1
Greg

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Haris Kurtagic
Sent: Monday, October 27, 2008 3:31 PM
To: FDO Internals Mail List
Subject: RE: [fdo-internals] RFC 27 for review

+1
Haris

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email]
[mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Jason Birch
Sent: Wednesday, October 22, 2008 9:04 PM
To: FDO Internals Mail List
Subject: RE: [fdo-internals] RFC 27 for review

Given that we've heard from most of the PSC and there has been no
negative feedback, I would like to move to accept RFC 27:

  http://trac.osgeo.org/fdo/wiki/FDORfc27

+1 Jason

-----Original Message-----
From: Jackie Ng
Subject: [fdo-internals] RFC 27 for review

RFC 27 has been posted (http://trac.osgeo.org/fdo/wiki/FDORfc27)

This RFC proposes that the FDO Toolbox project (currently at
http://fdotoolbox.googlecode.com) be migrated to the main FDO repository
and
officially be part of the FDO project.

_______________________________________________
fdo-internals mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/fdo-internals
_______________________________________________
fdo-internals mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/fdo-internals
_______________________________________________
fdo-internals mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/fdo-internals

[Jason Birch]

RFC 27 for bringing FDO Toolbox into the FDO fold has passed, with support from Greg, Haris, Frank, Orest, and Jason, which is as good as unanimous these days :)
 
As soon as the code can be migrated to our SVN and binaries posted on download.osgeo.org, I would like to see an announcement go out via the OSGeo news queue.  
 
http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/News_Queue
 
I can draft this if there are no other volunteers.
 
Jason

________________________________

From: Jason Birch
Subject: RE: [fdo-internals] RFC 27 for review

Given that we've heard from most of the PSC and there has been no
negative feedback, I would like to move to accept RFC 27:

  http://trac.osgeo.org/fdo/wiki/FDORfc27

+1 Jason



_______________________________________________
fdo-internals mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/fdo-internals

[zspitzer]

As a general question here, would it make more sense to create a separate trac instance
for FDO toolbox?

I am thinking specifically about how this has gone with the mapguide project, fusion for example
was moved to a seperate instance, whilst maestro still lives under mapguide.

It makes it's harder to track core mapguide stuff via timelines and the like due to the volume
or maestro specific stuff..

Thoughts?

z

On Thu, Nov 6, 2008 at 3:48 PM, Jason Birch <[hidden email]> wrote:

RFC 27 for bringing FDO Toolbox into the FDO fold has passed, with support from Greg, Haris, Frank, Orest, and Jason, which is as good as unanimous these days :)

As soon as the code can be migrated to our SVN and binaries posted on download.osgeo.org, I would like to see an announcement go out via the OSGeo news queue.

http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/News_Queue

I can draft this if there are no other volunteers.

Jason

________________________________

From: Jason Birch
Subject: RE: [fdo-internals] RFC 27 for review

Given that we've heard from most of the PSC and there has been no
negative feedback, I would like to move to accept RFC 27:

 http://trac.osgeo.org/fdo/wiki/FDORfc27

+1 Jason


_______________________________________________
fdo-internals mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/fdo-internals

--
Zac Spitzer -
http://zacster.blogspot.com (My Blog)
[phone]

_______________________________________________
fdo-internals mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/fdo-internals

[Kenneth Skovhede, GEOGRAF A/S]

Some javascript/style in this post has been disabled (why?)

I can say that the way Maestro is placed under the same trac instance makes some problems.
I imagine it is annoying to get commit messages from Maestro, if you are working on MapGuide.
I can also see that I get confused when I get a trac ticket that does not explicitly say "Maestro".
There seems to a number of tickets that initally gets assigned to something other than Maestro.
The version numbering does not work well, since Maestro and MapGuide uses different version numberings.

Like Zac notes, it is also difficult to find stuff that is specific to either project.

Are there stuff that the Fusion team belives would work better if they shared the trac with MapGuide?


Zac Spitzer skrev:

As a general question here, would it make more sense to create a separate trac instance
for FDO toolbox?

I am thinking specifically about how this has gone with the mapguide project, fusion for example
was moved to a seperate instance, whilst maestro still lives under mapguide.

It makes it's harder to track core mapguide stuff via timelines and the like due to the volume
or maestro specific stuff..

Thoughts?

z

On Thu, Nov 6, 2008 at 3:48 PM, Jason Birch <[hidden email]> wrote:

RFC 27 for bringing FDO Toolbox into the FDO fold has passed, with support from Greg, Haris, Frank, Orest, and Jason, which is as good as unanimous these days :)

As soon as the code can be migrated to our SVN and binaries posted on download.osgeo.org, I would like to see an announcement go out via the OSGeo news queue.

http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/News_Queue

I can draft this if there are no other volunteers.

Jason

________________________________

From: Jason Birch
Subject: RE: [fdo-internals] RFC 27 for review

Given that we've heard from most of the PSC and there has been no
negative feedback, I would like to move to accept RFC 27:

 http://trac.osgeo.org/fdo/wiki/FDORfc27

+1 Jason


_______________________________________________
fdo-internals mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/fdo-internals

--
Zac Spitzer -
http://zacster.blogspot.com (My Blog)
[phone]

_______________________________________________
fdo-internals mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/fdo-internals
  

_______________________________________________
fdo-internals mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/fdo-internals

[Kenneth Skovhede, GEOGRAF A/S]

Some javascript/style in this post has been disabled (why?)

I can say that the way Maestro is placed under the same trac instance makes some problems.
I imagine it is annoying to get commit messages from Maestro, if you are working on MapGuide.
I can also see that I get confused when I get a trac ticket that does not explicitly say "Maestro".
There seems to a number of tickets that initally gets assigned to something other than Maestro.
The version numbering does not work well, since Maestro and MapGuide uses different version numberings.

Like Zac notes, it is also difficult to find stuff that is specific to either project.

Are there stuff that the Fusion team belives would work better if they shared the trac with MapGuide?


Zac Spitzer skrev:

As a general question here, would it make more sense to create a separate trac instance
for FDO toolbox?

I am thinking specifically about how this has gone with the mapguide project, fusion for example
was moved to a seperate instance, whilst maestro still lives under mapguide.

It makes it's harder to track core mapguide stuff via timelines and the like due to the volume
or maestro specific stuff..

Thoughts?

z

On Thu, Nov 6, 2008 at 3:48 PM, Jason Birch <[hidden email]> wrote:

RFC 27 for bringing FDO Toolbox into the FDO fold has passed, with support from Greg, Haris, Frank, Orest, and Jason, which is as good as unanimous these days :)

As soon as the code can be migrated to our SVN and binaries posted on download.osgeo.org, I would like to see an announcement go out via the OSGeo news queue.

http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/News_Queue

I can draft this if there are no other volunteers.

Jason

________________________________

From: Jason Birch
Subject: RE: [fdo-internals] RFC 27 for review

Given that we've heard from most of the PSC and there has been no
negative feedback, I would like to move to accept RFC 27:

 http://trac.osgeo.org/fdo/wiki/FDORfc27

+1 Jason


_______________________________________________
fdo-internals mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/fdo-internals

--
Zac Spitzer -
http://zacster.blogspot.com (My Blog)
[phone]

_______________________________________________
fdo-internals mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/fdo-internals
  

_______________________________________________
fdo-internals mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/fdo-internals

[Jackie Ng]

I guess it would be more of a resourcing thing more than anything else.

Fusion has multiple developers/maintainers.

Maestro only has one active developer/maintainer (Kenneth)

Ditto with FDO Toolbox (me)

While it is ideal that Maestro and FDO Toolbox should have their own trac
instances the pratical question is, would OSGeo be willing to provide the
resources/infrastructure to a single developer? ;-)

- Jackie


zspitzer wrote:

>
> As a general question here, would it make more sense to create a separate
> trac instance
> for FDO toolbox?
>
> I am thinking specifically about how this has gone with the mapguide
> project, fusion for example
> was moved to a seperate instance, whilst maestro still lives under
> mapguide.
>
> It makes it's harder to track core mapguide stuff via timelines and the
> like
> due to the volume
> or maestro specific stuff..
>
> Thoughts?
>
> z
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 6, 2008 at 3:48 PM, Jason Birch <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
>> RFC 27 for bringing FDO Toolbox into the FDO fold has passed, with
>> support
>> from Greg, Haris, Frank, Orest, and Jason, which is as good as unanimous
>> these days :)
>>
>> As soon as the code can be migrated to our SVN and binaries posted on
>> download.osgeo.org, I would like to see an announcement go out via the
>> OSGeo news queue.
>>
>> http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/News_Queue
>>
>> I can draft this if there are no other volunteers.
>>
>> Jason
>>
>> ________________________________
>>
>> From: Jason Birch
>> Subject: RE: [fdo-internals] RFC 27 for review
>>
>> Given that we've heard from most of the PSC and there has been no
>> negative feedback, I would like to move to accept RFC 27:
>>
>>  http://trac.osgeo.org/fdo/wiki/FDORfc27
>>
>> +1 Jason
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> fdo-internals mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/fdo-internals
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Zac Spitzer -
> http://zacster.blogspot.com (My Blog)
> [phone]
>
> _______________________________________________
> fdo-internals mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/fdo-internals
>
>

--
View this message in context: http://n2.nabble.com/RFC-27-for-review-tp1343797p1478859.html
Sent from the FDO Internals mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

_______________________________________________
fdo-internals mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/fdo-internals

[Frank Warmerdam]

Jackie Ng wrote:

> I guess it would be more of a resourcing thing more than anything else.
>
> Fusion has multiple developers/maintainers.
>
> Maestro only has one active developer/maintainer (Kenneth)
>
> Ditto with FDO Toolbox (me)
>
> While it is ideal that Maestro and FDO Toolbox should have their own trac
> instances the pratical question is, would OSGeo be willing to provide the
> resources/infrastructure to a single developer? ;-)

Jackie,

I'd strongly like to encourage Maestro and FDO Toolbox to be treated as
part of the regular FDO Trac.  It gets messy to have many Trac instances
from a management and "finding your bugs" point of view.  The toolbox and
Maestro can have their own components, and might be released on their
own schedule for now, but would hopefully become more closely linked to
FDO releases over time.

(IMHO)

I would not be willing to volunteer to create additional Trac instances for
FDO sub-projects.

Best regards,
--
---------------------------------------+--------------------------------------
I set the clouds in motion - turn up   | Frank Warmerdam, [hidden email]
light and sound - activate the windows | http://pobox.com/~warmerdam
and watch the world go round - Rush    | Geospatial Programmer for Rent

_______________________________________________
fdo-internals mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/fdo-internals

[Jackie Ng]

That was a rhetorical question made as a response.

I've made my intentions clear in the RFC that I am happy for FDO Toolbox to
live inside the main FDO project.

- Jackie


Frank Warmerdam wrote:

>
>
> Jackie,
>
> I'd strongly like to encourage Maestro and FDO Toolbox to be treated as
> part of the regular FDO Trac.  It gets messy to have many Trac instances
> from a management and "finding your bugs" point of view.  The toolbox and
> Maestro can have their own components, and might be released on their
> own schedule for now, but would hopefully become more closely linked to
> FDO releases over time.
>
> (IMHO)
>
> I would not be willing to volunteer to create additional Trac instances
> for
> FDO sub-projects.
>
> Best regards,
> --
> ---------------------------------------+--------------------------------------
> I set the clouds in motion - turn up   | Frank Warmerdam,
> [hidden email]
> light and sound - activate the windows | http://pobox.com/~warmerdam
> and watch the world go round - Rush    | Geospatial Programmer for Rent
>
> _______________________________________________
> fdo-internals mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/fdo-internals
>
>

--
View this message in context: http://n2.nabble.com/RFC-27-for-review-tp1343797p1482608.html
Sent from the FDO Internals mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

_______________________________________________
fdo-internals mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/fdo-internals

[Greg Boone]

I agree with Frank. Let's make it a part of the FDO SVN.

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Jackie Ng
Sent: Monday, November 10, 2008 5:44 PM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [fdo-internals] RFC 27 - Passed


That was a rhetorical question made as a response.

I've made my intentions clear in the RFC that I am happy for FDO Toolbox to
live inside the main FDO project.

- Jackie


Frank Warmerdam wrote:

>
>
> Jackie,
>
> I'd strongly like to encourage Maestro and FDO Toolbox to be treated as
> part of the regular FDO Trac.  It gets messy to have many Trac instances
> from a management and "finding your bugs" point of view.  The toolbox and
> Maestro can have their own components, and might be released on their
> own schedule for now, but would hopefully become more closely linked to
> FDO releases over time.
>
> (IMHO)
>
> I would not be willing to volunteer to create additional Trac instances
> for
> FDO sub-projects.
>
> Best regards,
> --
> ---------------------------------------+--------------------------------------
> I set the clouds in motion - turn up   | Frank Warmerdam,
> [hidden email]
> light and sound - activate the windows | http://pobox.com/~warmerdam
> and watch the world go round - Rush    | Geospatial Programmer for Rent
>
> _______________________________________________
> fdo-internals mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/fdo-internals
>
>

--
View this message in context: http://n2.nabble.com/RFC-27-for-review-tp1343797p1482608.html
Sent from the FDO Internals mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

_______________________________________________
fdo-internals mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/fdo-internals
_______________________________________________
fdo-internals mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/fdo-internals