OSGeo.org › OSGeo Software and Data Projects › MapGuide Open Source › MapGuide Internals

Recent submissions by UV

20 messages

Recent submissions by UV

Reply Threaded

Hi All,

I thought UV was only supposed to make submissions to his RFC60 sandbox that was just created.
He has just made several submissions to branch/2.1 and not sandbox - some of the submissions are RFC60 related and others are not.

Have these submissions been code reviewed? I don't see a trac ticket for any of the submissions.

Thanks,
Bruce

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

Tom Fukushima

RE: Recent submissions by UV

Reply Threaded

In order to reduce the amount of work that might be required to clean this up, I have removed UV's commit rights for now, but will add them again once we get this cleared up.

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Bruce Dechant
Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 9:41 AM
To: MapGuide Internals Mail List
Subject: [mapguide-internals] Recent submissions by UV

Hi All,

I thought UV was only supposed to make submissions to his RFC60 sandbox that was just created.
He has just made several submissions to branch/2.1 and not sandbox - some of the submissions are RFC60 related and others are not.

Have these submissions been code reviewed? I don't see a trac ticket for any of the submissions.

Thanks,
Bruce

_______________________________________________
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

UV-2

Re: RE: Recent submissions by UV

Reply Threaded

Sorry about this!

I had a missing recursion flag in my top level directory of my working copy.
So the switch worked fine..... but only for the top level...
consequently the checkins went into the wrong place..

I have been trying to fix this for the last hour!
Now I understand why I got those funny 403 errors

too bad that the revoking happens immediately between my mistake and my
attempt to clean up....
and before checking in the files in the right place.

this creates the maximum amount of work for someone else!

Tom Fukushima wrote:

> In order to reduce the amount of work that might be required to clean this up, I have removed UV's commit rights for now, but will add them again once we get this cleared up.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Bruce Dechant
> Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 9:41 AM
> To: MapGuide Internals Mail List
> Subject: [mapguide-internals] Recent submissions by UV
>
> Hi All,
>
> I thought UV was only supposed to make submissions to his RFC60 sandbox that was just created.
> He has just made several submissions to branch/2.1 and not sandbox - some of the submissions are RFC60 related and others are not.
>
> Have these submissions been code reviewed? I don't see a trac ticket for any of the submissions.
>
> Thanks,
> Bruce
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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

RE: Recent submissions by UV

Reply Threaded

In reply to this post by Tom Fukushima

UV's commit rights were granted under the assumption that he would commit only to the sandbox. Personally I am disappointed in what has happened whether it was accidental or otherwise. I can perform the cleanup work if that is what we want to do.

I think we need to make the call ASAP as to what is going into the release. Some members of the community are telling us to ship it now, some would like to see RFC 60 implemented, and some would like a Fusion update.

Thanks,
Trevor

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Tom Fukushima
Sent: September 21, 2009 9:49 AM
To: MapGuide Internals Mail List
Subject: [mapguide-internals] RE: Recent submissions by UV

In order to reduce the amount of work that might be required to clean this up, I have removed UV's commit rights for now, but will add them again once we get this cleared up.

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Bruce Dechant
Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 9:41 AM
To: MapGuide Internals Mail List
Subject: [mapguide-internals] Recent submissions by UV

Hi All,

I thought UV was only supposed to make submissions to his RFC60 sandbox that was just created.
He has just made several submissions to branch/2.1 and not sandbox - some of the submissions are RFC60 related and others are not.

Have these submissions been code reviewed? I don't see a trac ticket for any of the submissions.

Thanks,
Bruce

_______________________________________________
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

RE: RE: Recent submissions by UV

Reply Threaded

In reply to this post by UV-2

Hi UV,

I am very glad to hear that this was accidental!

Do you need two branches - a branch of 2.1 so you can build for Explore Australia and a branch for trunk for inclusion into the 2.2 release? I think the PSC still needs to determine if we are going to include RFC 60 in 2.1.

Tom, should we reinstate UV's commit rights so he can clean up the 2.1 submission?

Thanks,
Trevor

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of UV
Sent: September 21, 2009 10:30 AM
To: MapGuide Internals Mail List
Subject: Re: [mapguide-internals] RE: Recent submissions by UV

Sorry about this!

I had a missing recursion flag in my top level directory of my working copy.
So the switch worked fine..... but only for the top level...
consequently the checkins went into the wrong place..

I have been trying to fix this for the last hour!
Now I understand why I got those funny 403 errors

too bad that the revoking happens immediately between my mistake and my
attempt to clean up....
and before checking in the files in the right place.

this creates the maximum amount of work for someone else!

Tom Fukushima wrote:

Tom Fukushima

RE: RE: Recent submissions by UV

Reply Threaded

I'm trying to give the commit rights back, but I can't get into the osgeo page to do it.

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Trevor Wekel
Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 10:52 AM
To: MapGuide Internals Mail List
Subject: RE: [mapguide-internals] RE: Recent submissions by UV

Hi UV,

I am very glad to hear that this was accidental!

Do you need two branches - a branch of 2.1 so you can build for Explore Australia and a branch for trunk for inclusion into the 2.2 release? I think the PSC still needs to determine if we are going to include RFC 60 in 2.1.

Tom, should we reinstate UV's commit rights so he can clean up the 2.1 submission?

Thanks,
Trevor

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of UV
Sent: September 21, 2009 10:30 AM
To: MapGuide Internals Mail List
Subject: Re: [mapguide-internals] RE: Recent submissions by UV

Sorry about this!

I had a missing recursion flag in my top level directory of my working copy.
So the switch worked fine..... but only for the top level...
consequently the checkins went into the wrong place..

I have been trying to fix this for the last hour!
Now I understand why I got those funny 403 errors

too bad that the revoking happens immediately between my mistake and my
attempt to clean up....
and before checking in the files in the right place.

this creates the maximum amount of work for someone else!

Tom Fukushima wrote:

UV-2

Re: RE: Recent submissions by UV

Reply Threaded

I have a clean state of 2.1 from directly before the checkin on my disk
so reverting should be easy for me.
I am sure this will be the easiest solution for everyone if I "move" the
changes to the sandbox

Sorry again or the mixup.

Tom Fukushima wrote:

> I'm trying to give the commit rights back, but I can't get into the osgeo page to do it.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Trevor Wekel
> Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 10:52 AM
> To: MapGuide Internals Mail List
> Subject: RE: [mapguide-internals] RE: Recent submissions by UV
>
> Hi UV,
>
> I am very glad to hear that this was accidental!
>
> Do you need two branches - a branch of 2.1 so you can build for Explore Australia and a branch for trunk for inclusion into the 2.2 release? I think the PSC still needs to determine if we are going to include RFC 60 in 2.1.
>
>
> Tom, should we reinstate UV's commit rights so he can clean up the 2.1 submission?
>
> Thanks,
> Trevor
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of UV
> Sent: September 21, 2009 10:30 AM
> To: MapGuide Internals Mail List
> Subject: Re: [mapguide-internals] RE: Recent submissions by UV
>
> Sorry about this!
>
> I had a missing recursion flag in my top level directory of my working copy.
> So the switch worked fine..... but only for the top level...
> consequently the checkins went into the wrong place..
>
> I have been trying to fix this for the last hour!
> Now I understand why I got those funny 403 errors
>
> too bad that the revoking happens immediately between my mistake and my
> attempt to clean up....
> and before checking in the files in the right place.
>
> this creates the maximum amount of work for someone else!
>
>
>
> Tom Fukushima wrote:
>
>> In order to reduce the amount of work that might be required to clean this up, I have removed UV's commit rights for now, but will add them again once we get this cleared up.
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Bruce Dechant
>> Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 9:41 AM
>> To: MapGuide Internals Mail List
>> Subject: [mapguide-internals] Recent submissions by UV
>>
>> Hi All,
>>
>> I thought UV was only supposed to make submissions to his RFC60 sandbox that was just created.
>> He has just made several submissions to branch/2.1 and not sandbox - some of the submissions are RFC60 related and others are not.
>>
>> Have these submissions been code reviewed? I don't see a trac ticket for any of the submissions.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Bruce
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
> _______________________________________________
> 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

Tom Fukushima

RE: RE: Recent submissions by UV

Reply Threaded

In reply to this post by Tom Fukushima

BTW, my access problem is not an OSGeo site problem, it's because I can't get on the web right now for some unknown reason.

Trevor, can I take you up on your offer and have you clean up the submissions to the 2.1 branch?

UV, according to ticket http://trac.osgeo.org/osgeo/ticket/400 you have commit rights to the sandbox so you should already be able to commit there without me doing anything.

Thanks
Tom

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Tom Fukushima
Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 10:57 AM
To: MapGuide Internals Mail List
Subject: RE: [mapguide-internals] RE: Recent submissions by UV

I'm trying to give the commit rights back, but I can't get into the osgeo page to do it.

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Trevor Wekel
Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 10:52 AM
To: MapGuide Internals Mail List
Subject: RE: [mapguide-internals] RE: Recent submissions by UV

Hi UV,

I am very glad to hear that this was accidental!

Do you need two branches - a branch of 2.1 so you can build for Explore Australia and a branch for trunk for inclusion into the 2.2 release? I think the PSC still needs to determine if we are going to include RFC 60 in 2.1.

Tom, should we reinstate UV's commit rights so he can clean up the 2.1 submission?

Thanks,
Trevor

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of UV
Sent: September 21, 2009 10:30 AM
To: MapGuide Internals Mail List
Subject: Re: [mapguide-internals] RE: Recent submissions by UV

Sorry about this!

I had a missing recursion flag in my top level directory of my working copy.
So the switch worked fine..... but only for the top level...
consequently the checkins went into the wrong place..

I have been trying to fix this for the last hour!
Now I understand why I got those funny 403 errors

too bad that the revoking happens immediately between my mistake and my
attempt to clean up....
and before checking in the files in the right place.

this creates the maximum amount of work for someone else!

Tom Fukushima wrote:

_______________________________________________
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

Andy Morsell

RE: RE: Recent submissions by UV

Reply Threaded

In reply to this post by Trevor Wekel

Regarding the release decision: before we make a decision I think that we
need a date estimate on the Fusion update. I am in the "release only when
Fusion is updated" camp, but I also agree that if we wait much longer then
we are going to have a mutiny on our hands. Also, if RFC 60 is not
included, what exactly is the impact on the general user community?

Andy

-----Original Message-----
From: Trevor Wekel [mailto:[hidden email]]
Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 9:48 AM
To: MapGuide Internals Mail List
Subject: [mapguide-internals] RE: Recent submissions by UV

UV's commit rights were granted under the assumption that he would commit
only to the sandbox. Personally I am disappointed in what has happened
whether it was accidental or otherwise. I can perform the cleanup work if
that is what we want to do.

I think we need to make the call ASAP as to what is going into the release.
Some members of the community are telling us to ship it now, some would like
to see RFC 60 implemented, and some would like a Fusion update.

Thanks,
Trevor

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email]
[mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Tom
Fukushima
Sent: September 21, 2009 9:49 AM
To: MapGuide Internals Mail List
Subject: [mapguide-internals] RE: Recent submissions by UV

In order to reduce the amount of work that might be required to clean this
up, I have removed UV's commit rights for now, but will add them again once
we get this cleared up.

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email]
[mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Bruce
Dechant
Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 9:41 AM
To: MapGuide Internals Mail List
Subject: [mapguide-internals] Recent submissions by UV

Hi All,

I thought UV was only supposed to make submissions to his RFC60 sandbox that
was just created.
He has just made several submissions to branch/2.1 and not sandbox - some of
the submissions are RFC60 related and others are not.

Have these submissions been code reviewed? I don't see a trac ticket for any
of the submissions.

Thanks,
Bruce

_______________________________________________
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

RE: RE: Recent submissions by UV

Reply Threaded

In reply to this post by Tom Fukushima

Ok. I am working on the revert.

Thanks,
Trevor

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Tom Fukushima
Sent: September 21, 2009 11:37 AM
To: MapGuide Internals Mail List
Subject: RE: [mapguide-internals] RE: Recent submissions by UV

BTW, my access problem is not an OSGeo site problem, it's because I can't get on the web right now for some unknown reason.

Trevor, can I take you up on your offer and have you clean up the submissions to the 2.1 branch?

UV, according to ticket http://trac.osgeo.org/osgeo/ticket/400 you have commit rights to the sandbox so you should already be able to commit there without me doing anything.

Thanks
Tom

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Tom Fukushima
Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 10:57 AM
To: MapGuide Internals Mail List
Subject: RE: [mapguide-internals] RE: Recent submissions by UV

I'm trying to give the commit rights back, but I can't get into the osgeo page to do it.

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Trevor Wekel
Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 10:52 AM
To: MapGuide Internals Mail List
Subject: RE: [mapguide-internals] RE: Recent submissions by UV

Hi UV,

I am very glad to hear that this was accidental!

Do you need two branches - a branch of 2.1 so you can build for Explore Australia and a branch for trunk for inclusion into the 2.2 release? I think the PSC still needs to determine if we are going to include RFC 60 in 2.1.

Tom, should we reinstate UV's commit rights so he can clean up the 2.1 submission?

Thanks,
Trevor

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of UV
Sent: September 21, 2009 10:30 AM
To: MapGuide Internals Mail List
Subject: Re: [mapguide-internals] RE: Recent submissions by UV

Sorry about this!

I had a missing recursion flag in my top level directory of my working copy.
So the switch worked fine..... but only for the top level...
consequently the checkins went into the wrong place..

I have been trying to fix this for the last hour!
Now I understand why I got those funny 403 errors

too bad that the revoking happens immediately between my mistake and my
attempt to clean up....
and before checking in the files in the right place.

this creates the maximum amount of work for someone else!

Tom Fukushima wrote:

Jason Birch

Re: RE: Recent submissions by UV

Reply Threaded

In reply to this post by Andy Morsell

Although I was of the same thought initially, I don' think we can count on a
Fusion release. My current thought is to release a 2.1 RC with Fusion
trunk. I hope to be able to get this built today.

Jason

2009/9/21 Andy Morsell <[hidden email]>

> Regarding the release decision: before we make a decision I think that we
> need a date estimate on the Fusion update. I am in the "release only when
> Fusion is updated" camp, but I also agree that if we wait much longer then
> we are going to have a mutiny on our hands. Also, if RFC 60 is not
> included, what exactly is the impact on the general user community?
>
> Andy
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Trevor Wekel [mailto:[hidden email]]
> Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 9:48 AM
> To: MapGuide Internals Mail List
> Subject: [mapguide-internals] RE: Recent submissions by UV
>
> UV's commit rights were granted under the assumption that he would commit
> only to the sandbox. Personally I am disappointed in what has happened
> whether it was accidental or otherwise. I can perform the cleanup work if
> that is what we want to do.
>
> I think we need to make the call ASAP as to what is going into the release.
> Some members of the community are telling us to ship it now, some would
> like
> to see RFC 60 implemented, and some would like a Fusion update.
>
> Thanks,
> Trevor
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [hidden email]
> [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Tom
> Fukushima
> Sent: September 21, 2009 9:49 AM
> To: MapGuide Internals Mail List
> Subject: [mapguide-internals] RE: Recent submissions by UV
>
> In order to reduce the amount of work that might be required to clean this
> up, I have removed UV's commit rights for now, but will add them again once
> we get this cleared up.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [hidden email]
> [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Bruce
> Dechant
> Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 9:41 AM
> To: MapGuide Internals Mail List
> Subject: [mapguide-internals] Recent submissions by UV
>
> Hi All,
>
> I thought UV was only supposed to make submissions to his RFC60 sandbox
> that
> was just created.
> He has just made several submissions to branch/2.1 and not sandbox - some
> of
> the submissions are RFC60 related and others are not.
>
> Have these submissions been code reviewed? I don't see a trac ticket for
> any
> of the submissions.
>
> Thanks,
> Bruce
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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

Trevor Wekel

RE: RE: Recent submissions by UV

Reply Threaded

Hi Jason,

Since the latest test build contained Fusion trunk, we could say that it has already been released to the community. We are bending the rules a bit but I am ok with calling it RC1. Since RFC 60 needs official review, I think we should defer it to MGOS 2.2.

Will this work for an MGOS 2.1 timeline given that the MGOS code base has already been released and service packed "elsewhere"?

- This week MGOS 2.1 RC1
- Week of October 19th MGOS 2.1 Final Release. Note: The RC1 build may simply be promoted to Final Release if no showstopper defects are found.

I would also like to start producing MGOS 2.2 Beta builds ASAP. I think it would be good to target October 9th as the date for the first MGOS 2.2 Beta.

I should have RFC 60 reverted in an hour or so.

Thanks,
Trevor

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Jason Birch
Sent: September 21, 2009 2:13 PM
To: MapGuide Internals Mail List
Subject: Re: [mapguide-internals] RE: Recent submissions by UV

Although I was of the same thought initially, I don' think we can count on a
Fusion release. My current thought is to release a 2.1 RC with Fusion
trunk. I hope to be able to get this built today.

Jason

2009/9/21 Andy Morsell <[hidden email]>

Jason Birch

Re: RE: Recent submissions by UV

Reply Threaded

That timeline works for me OK. I hope to be able to produce a built tonight
for some testing.
I'll title it RC for now; since we were planning on pushing the Beta to
Release status if possible, it's better described as an RC anyway.

Jason

2009/9/21 Trevor Wekel <[hidden email]>

> Hi Jason,
>
> Since the latest test build contained Fusion trunk, we could say that it
> has already been released to the community. We are bending the rules a bit
> but I am ok with calling it RC1. Since RFC 60 needs official review, I
> think we should defer it to MGOS 2.2.
>
> Will this work for an MGOS 2.1 timeline given that the MGOS code base has
> already been released and service packed "elsewhere"?
>
> - This week MGOS 2.1 RC1
> - Week of October 19th MGOS 2.1 Final Release. Note: The RC1 build may
> simply be promoted to Final Release if no showstopper defects are found.
>
> I would also like to start producing MGOS 2.2 Beta builds ASAP. I think it
> would be good to target October 9th as the date for the first MGOS 2.2 Beta.
>
>
> I should have RFC 60 reverted in an hour or so.
>
> Thanks,
> Trevor
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [hidden email] [mailto:
> [hidden email]] On Behalf Of Jason Birch
> Sent: September 21, 2009 2:13 PM
> To: MapGuide Internals Mail List
> Subject: Re: [mapguide-internals] RE: Recent submissions by UV
>
> Although I was of the same thought initially, I don' think we can count on
> a
> Fusion release. My current thought is to release a 2.1 RC with Fusion
> trunk. I hope to be able to get this built today.
>
> Jason
>
> 2009/9/21 Andy Morsell <[hidden email]>
>
> > Regarding the release decision: before we make a decision I think that we
> > need a date estimate on the Fusion update. I am in the "release only
> when
> > Fusion is updated" camp, but I also agree that if we wait much longer
> then
> > we are going to have a mutiny on our hands. Also, if RFC 60 is not
> > included, what exactly is the impact on the general user community?
> >
> > Andy
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Trevor Wekel [mailto:[hidden email]]
> > Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 9:48 AM
> > To: MapGuide Internals Mail List
> > Subject: [mapguide-internals] RE: Recent submissions by UV
> >
> > UV's commit rights were granted under the assumption that he would commit
> > only to the sandbox. Personally I am disappointed in what has happened
> > whether it was accidental or otherwise. I can perform the cleanup work
> if
> > that is what we want to do.
> >
> > I think we need to make the call ASAP as to what is going into the
> release.
> > Some members of the community are telling us to ship it now, some would
> > like
> > to see RFC 60 implemented, and some would like a Fusion update.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Trevor
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [hidden email]
> > [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Tom
> > Fukushima
> > Sent: September 21, 2009 9:49 AM
> > To: MapGuide Internals Mail List
> > Subject: [mapguide-internals] RE: Recent submissions by UV
> >
> > In order to reduce the amount of work that might be required to clean
> this
> > up, I have removed UV's commit rights for now, but will add them again
> once
> > we get this cleared up.
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [hidden email]
> > [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Bruce
> > Dechant
> > Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 9:41 AM
> > To: MapGuide Internals Mail List
> > Subject: [mapguide-internals] Recent submissions by UV
> >
> > Hi All,
> >
> > I thought UV was only supposed to make submissions to his RFC60 sandbox
> > that
> > was just created.
> > He has just made several submissions to branch/2.1 and not sandbox - some
> > of
> > the submissions are RFC60 related and others are not.
> >
> > Have these submissions been code reviewed? I don't see a trac ticket for
> > any
> > of the submissions.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Bruce
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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

Paul Spencer-2

Re: RE: Recent submissions by UV

Reply Threaded

In reply to this post by Trevor Wekel

I'll talk to Mike about taking the current trunk version of fusion
over to the 2.0 branch and starting with a 2.0 beta 1 release.
Hopefully this will happen tomorrow.

Cheers

Paul

On 2009-09-21, at 4:49 PM, Trevor Wekel wrote:

> Hi Jason,
>
> Since the latest test build contained Fusion trunk, we could say
> that it has already been released to the community. We are bending
> the rules a bit but I am ok with calling it RC1. Since RFC 60 needs
> official review, I think we should defer it to MGOS 2.2.
>
> Will this work for an MGOS 2.1 timeline given that the MGOS code
> base has already been released and service packed "elsewhere"?
>
> - This week MGOS 2.1 RC1
> - Week of October 19th MGOS 2.1 Final Release. Note: The RC1 build
> may simply be promoted to Final Release if no showstopper defects
> are found.
>
> I would also like to start producing MGOS 2.2 Beta builds ASAP. I
> think it would be good to target October 9th as the date for the
> first MGOS 2.2 Beta.
>
>
> I should have RFC 60 reverted in an hour or so.
>
> Thanks,
> Trevor
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [hidden email] [mailto:mapguide-
> [hidden email]] On Behalf Of Jason Birch
> Sent: September 21, 2009 2:13 PM
> To: MapGuide Internals Mail List
> Subject: Re: [mapguide-internals] RE: Recent submissions by UV
>
> Although I was of the same thought initially, I don' think we can
> count on a
> Fusion release. My current thought is to release a 2.1 RC with Fusion
> trunk. I hope to be able to get this built today.
>
> Jason
>
> 2009/9/21 Andy Morsell <[hidden email]>
>
>> Regarding the release decision: before we make a decision I think
>> that we
>> need a date estimate on the Fusion update. I am in the "release
>> only when
>> Fusion is updated" camp, but I also agree that if we wait much
>> longer then
>> we are going to have a mutiny on our hands. Also, if RFC 60 is not
>> included, what exactly is the impact on the general user community?
>>
>> Andy
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Trevor Wekel [mailto:[hidden email]]
>> Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 9:48 AM
>> To: MapGuide Internals Mail List
>> Subject: [mapguide-internals] RE: Recent submissions by UV
>>
>> UV's commit rights were granted under the assumption that he would
>> commit
>> only to the sandbox. Personally I am disappointed in what has
>> happened
>> whether it was accidental or otherwise. I can perform the cleanup
>> work if
>> that is what we want to do.
>>
>> I think we need to make the call ASAP as to what is going into the
>> release.
>> Some members of the community are telling us to ship it now, some
>> would
>> like
>> to see RFC 60 implemented, and some would like a Fusion update.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Trevor
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: [hidden email]
>> [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Tom
>> Fukushima
>> Sent: September 21, 2009 9:49 AM
>> To: MapGuide Internals Mail List
>> Subject: [mapguide-internals] RE: Recent submissions by UV
>>
>> In order to reduce the amount of work that might be required to
>> clean this
>> up, I have removed UV's commit rights for now, but will add them
>> again once
>> we get this cleared up.
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: [hidden email]
>> [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of
>> Bruce
>> Dechant
>> Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 9:41 AM
>> To: MapGuide Internals Mail List
>> Subject: [mapguide-internals] Recent submissions by UV
>>
>> Hi All,
>>
>> I thought UV was only supposed to make submissions to his RFC60
>> sandbox
>> that
>> was just created.
>> He has just made several submissions to branch/2.1 and not sandbox
>> - some
>> of
>> the submissions are RFC60 related and others are not.
>>
>> Have these submissions been code reviewed? I don't see a trac
>> ticket for
>> any
>> of the submissions.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Bruce
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> mapguide-internals mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapguide-internals

Trevor Wekel

RE: RE: Recent submissions by UV

Reply Threaded

Ok. The accidental RFC 60 submission has been reverted. Should we hold off on the build until Mike can update the fusion 2.0 branch?

I checked the svn:externals definition and branches/2.1/Oem/fusion is current pointing to fusion/branches/fusion-2.0 so a new build will automatically pick up the changes.

Thanks,
Trevor

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Paul Spencer
Sent: September 21, 2009 3:20 PM
To: MapGuide Internals Mail List
Subject: Re: [mapguide-internals] RE: Recent submissions by UV

I'll talk to Mike about taking the current trunk version of fusion
over to the 2.0 branch and starting with a 2.0 beta 1 release.
Hopefully this will happen tomorrow.

Cheers

Paul

On 2009-09-21, at 4:49 PM, Trevor Wekel wrote:

__________________________________________

Paul Spencer
Chief Technology Officer
DM Solutions Group Inc
http://research.dmsolutions.ca/

_______________________________________________
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

Re: RE: Recent submissions by UV

Reply Threaded

That branch is super out-of-date; it's likely easier for Mike to delete it
and re-branch trunk (in the same place if desired).
My build environment is ready to go so, barring personal commitments, I can
push a build most nights this week.

Jason

2009/9/21 Trevor Wekel <[hidden email]>

> Ok. The accidental RFC 60 submission has been reverted. Should we hold
> off on the build until Mike can update the fusion 2.0 branch?
>
> I checked the svn:externals definition and branches/2.1/Oem/fusion is
> current pointing to fusion/branches/fusion-2.0 so a new build will
> automatically pick up the changes.
>
> Thanks,
> Trevor
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [hidden email] [mailto:
> [hidden email]] On Behalf Of Paul Spencer
> Sent: September 21, 2009 3:20 PM
> To: MapGuide Internals Mail List
> Subject: Re: [mapguide-internals] RE: Recent submissions by UV
>
> I'll talk to Mike about taking the current trunk version of fusion
> over to the 2.0 branch and starting with a 2.0 beta 1 release.
> Hopefully this will happen tomorrow.
>
> Cheers
>
> Paul
>
> On 2009-09-21, at 4:49 PM, Trevor Wekel wrote:
>
> > Hi Jason,
> >
> > Since the latest test build contained Fusion trunk, we could say
> > that it has already been released to the community. We are bending
> > the rules a bit but I am ok with calling it RC1. Since RFC 60 needs
> > official review, I think we should defer it to MGOS 2.2.
> >
> > Will this work for an MGOS 2.1 timeline given that the MGOS code
> > base has already been released and service packed "elsewhere"?
> >
> > - This week MGOS 2.1 RC1
> > - Week of October 19th MGOS 2.1 Final Release. Note: The RC1 build
> > may simply be promoted to Final Release if no showstopper defects
> > are found.
> >
> > I would also like to start producing MGOS 2.2 Beta builds ASAP. I
> > think it would be good to target October 9th as the date for the
> > first MGOS 2.2 Beta.
> >
> >
> > I should have RFC 60 reverted in an hour or so.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Trevor
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [hidden email] [mailto:mapguide-
> > [hidden email]] On Behalf Of Jason Birch
> > Sent: September 21, 2009 2:13 PM
> > To: MapGuide Internals Mail List
> > Subject: Re: [mapguide-internals] RE: Recent submissions by UV
> >
> > Although I was of the same thought initially, I don' think we can
> > count on a
> > Fusion release. My current thought is to release a 2.1 RC with Fusion
> > trunk. I hope to be able to get this built today.
> >
> > Jason
> >
> > 2009/9/21 Andy Morsell <[hidden email]>
> >
> >> Regarding the release decision: before we make a decision I think
> >> that we
> >> need a date estimate on the Fusion update. I am in the "release
> >> only when
> >> Fusion is updated" camp, but I also agree that if we wait much
> >> longer then
> >> we are going to have a mutiny on our hands. Also, if RFC 60 is not
> >> included, what exactly is the impact on the general user community?
> >>
> >> Andy
> >>
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Trevor Wekel [mailto:[hidden email]]
> >> Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 9:48 AM
> >> To: MapGuide Internals Mail List
> >> Subject: [mapguide-internals] RE: Recent submissions by UV
> >>
> >> UV's commit rights were granted under the assumption that he would
> >> commit
> >> only to the sandbox. Personally I am disappointed in what has
> >> happened
> >> whether it was accidental or otherwise. I can perform the cleanup
> >> work if
> >> that is what we want to do.
> >>
> >> I think we need to make the call ASAP as to what is going into the
> >> release.
> >> Some members of the community are telling us to ship it now, some
> >> would
> >> like
> >> to see RFC 60 implemented, and some would like a Fusion update.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Trevor
> >>
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: [hidden email]
> >> [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Tom
> >> Fukushima
> >> Sent: September 21, 2009 9:49 AM
> >> To: MapGuide Internals Mail List
> >> Subject: [mapguide-internals] RE: Recent submissions by UV
> >>
> >> In order to reduce the amount of work that might be required to
> >> clean this
> >> up, I have removed UV's commit rights for now, but will add them
> >> again once
> >> we get this cleared up.
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: [hidden email]
> >> [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of
> >> Bruce
> >> Dechant
> >> Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 9:41 AM
> >> To: MapGuide Internals Mail List
> >> Subject: [mapguide-internals] Recent submissions by UV
> >>
> >> Hi All,
> >>
> >> I thought UV was only supposed to make submissions to his RFC60
> >> sandbox
> >> that
> >> was just created.
> >> He has just made several submissions to branch/2.1 and not sandbox
> >> - some
> >> of
> >> the submissions are RFC60 related and others are not.
> >>
> >> Have these submissions been code reviewed? I don't see a trac
> >> ticket for
> >> any
> >> of the submissions.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Bruce
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> 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
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > mapguide-internals mailing list
> > [hidden email]
> > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapguide-internals
>
>
> __________________________________________
>
> Paul Spencer
> Chief Technology Officer
> DM Solutions Group Inc
> http://research.dmsolutions.ca/
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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

Mike Adair

Re: RE: Recent submissions by UV

Reply Threaded

In reply to this post by Paul Spencer-2

It would be helpful to know which bugs are critical to be fixed for the
release. There is a long list there now and I don't see them all
getting fixed soon so if we can get the most important ones marked as
P1, we can tackle those first.

Mike

Paul Spencer wrote:

> I'll talk to Mike about taking the current trunk version of fusion
> over to the 2.0 branch and starting with a 2.0 beta 1 release.
> Hopefully this will happen tomorrow.
>
> Cheers
>
> Paul
>
> On 2009-09-21, at 4:49 PM, Trevor Wekel wrote:
>
>> Hi Jason,
>>
>> Since the latest test build contained Fusion trunk, we could say that
>> it has already been released to the community. We are bending the
>> rules a bit but I am ok with calling it RC1. Since RFC 60 needs
>> official review, I think we should defer it to MGOS 2.2.
>>
>> Will this work for an MGOS 2.1 timeline given that the MGOS code base
>> has already been released and service packed "elsewhere"?
>>
>> - This week MGOS 2.1 RC1
>> - Week of October 19th MGOS 2.1 Final Release. Note: The RC1 build
>> may simply be promoted to Final Release if no showstopper defects are
>> found.
>>
>> I would also like to start producing MGOS 2.2 Beta builds ASAP. I
>> think it would be good to target October 9th as the date for the
>> first MGOS 2.2 Beta.
>>
>>
>> I should have RFC 60 reverted in an hour or so.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Trevor
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: [hidden email]
>> [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of
>> Jason Birch
>> Sent: September 21, 2009 2:13 PM
>> To: MapGuide Internals Mail List
>> Subject: Re: [mapguide-internals] RE: Recent submissions by UV
>>
>> Although I was of the same thought initially, I don' think we can
>> count on a
>> Fusion release. My current thought is to release a 2.1 RC with Fusion
>> trunk. I hope to be able to get this built today.
>>
>> Jason
>>
>> 2009/9/21 Andy Morsell <[hidden email]>
>>
>>> Regarding the release decision: before we make a decision I think
>>> that we
>>> need a date estimate on the Fusion update. I am in the "release
>>> only when
>>> Fusion is updated" camp, but I also agree that if we wait much
>>> longer then
>>> we are going to have a mutiny on our hands. Also, if RFC 60 is not
>>> included, what exactly is the impact on the general user community?
>>>
>>> Andy
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Trevor Wekel [mailto:[hidden email]]
>>> Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 9:48 AM
>>> To: MapGuide Internals Mail List
>>> Subject: [mapguide-internals] RE: Recent submissions by UV
>>>
>>> UV's commit rights were granted under the assumption that he would
>>> commit
>>> only to the sandbox. Personally I am disappointed in what has happened
>>> whether it was accidental or otherwise. I can perform the cleanup
>>> work if
>>> that is what we want to do.
>>>
>>> I think we need to make the call ASAP as to what is going into the
>>> release.
>>> Some members of the community are telling us to ship it now, some would
>>> like
>>> to see RFC 60 implemented, and some would like a Fusion update.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Trevor
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: [hidden email]
>>> [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Tom
>>> Fukushima
>>> Sent: September 21, 2009 9:49 AM
>>> To: MapGuide Internals Mail List
>>> Subject: [mapguide-internals] RE: Recent submissions by UV
>>>
>>> In order to reduce the amount of work that might be required to
>>> clean this
>>> up, I have removed UV's commit rights for now, but will add them
>>> again once
>>> we get this cleared up.
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: [hidden email]
>>> [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Bruce
>>> Dechant
>>> Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 9:41 AM
>>> To: MapGuide Internals Mail List
>>> Subject: [mapguide-internals] Recent submissions by UV
>>>
>>> Hi All,
>>>
>>> I thought UV was only supposed to make submissions to his RFC60 sandbox
>>> that
>>> was just created.
>>> He has just made several submissions to branch/2.1 and not sandbox -
>>> some
>>> of
>>> the submissions are RFC60 related and others are not.
>>>
>>> Have these submissions been code reviewed? I don't see a trac ticket
>>> for
>>> any
>>> of the submissions.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Bruce
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> mapguide-internals mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapguide-internals
>
>
> __________________________________________
>
> Paul Spencer
> Chief Technology Officer
> DM Solutions Group Inc
> http://research.dmsolutions.ca/
>
> _______________________________________________
> mapguide-internals mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapguide-internals
>

Trevor Wekel

RE: RE: Recent submissions by UV

Reply Threaded

The last MapGuide build Jason posted to http://download.osgeo.org/mapguide/testing/ was on August 3rd. I did a quick scan on the Fusion trunk code base and compared it to the Fusion tree installed by the build. It looks as though http://trac.osgeo.org/fusion/changeset/1887 dated July 28th was the last change present in the August 3rd posting.

Jason has done some testing on the build and the community has had access to the build with Fusion trunk for a month and a half. Instead of trying to backport a set of fixes to Fusion 2.0, Jason has suggested we simply do a wholesale replace of Fusion 2.0 from Fusion trunk. I agree with his approach as long as we use changeset 1887 for Fusion 2.0.

And a wholesale replace is much easier than backporting...

Thanks,
Trevor

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Mike Adair
Sent: September 22, 2009 7:47 AM
To: MapGuide Internals Mail List
Subject: Re: [mapguide-internals] RE: Recent submissions by UV

It would be helpful to know which bugs are critical to be fixed for the
release. There is a long list there now and I don't see them all
getting fixed soon so if we can get the most important ones marked as
P1, we can tackle those first.

Mike

Paul Spencer wrote:

--
Michael Adair
Senior Software Architect
DM Solutions Group Inc.

Office: (613) 565-5056 x26
[hidden email]
http://www.dmsolutions.ca
http://research.dmsolutions.ca

_______________________________________________
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

Paul Spencer-2

Fusion versioning (was Re: RE: Recent submissions by UV)

Reply Threaded

Mike is looking at the P1 bugs in trac right now and fixing what he
can today, then we will svn del the fusion 2.0 branch and svn copy
trunk to fusion 2.0 branch (the wholesale change) at the end of the
day. This will form the basis of a fusion 2.0 beta 1 release, but I
think there are a few more bugs that should be looked at before we
actually release a beta (of fusion).

Most of the changes between 1887 and 1903 (the latest one) are related
to fixing autodesk-reported defects which I am sure they will want in
the branch. Is there any particular reason why you don't want to
include changes after 1887?

We will go through the Fusion issue list and try to rejig things into
the right milestones and priorities as soon as we can log into trace.
It will also help if we can get some feedback on which are the highest
priority issues from the mapguide community/developers.

Things that jump out to me are the Measure widget, making sure
anonymous access works properly, commercial layer issues, and some
Legend related issues. Probably any enhancements will be deferred
until after 2.0

Paul

On 2009-09-22, at 11:44 AM, Trevor Wekel wrote:

> The last MapGuide build Jason posted to http://download.osgeo.org/mapguide/testing/
> was on August 3rd. I did a quick scan on the Fusion trunk code
> base and compared it to the Fusion tree installed by the build. It
> looks as though http://trac.osgeo.org/fusion/changeset/1887 dated
> July 28th was the last change present in the August 3rd posting.
>
> Jason has done some testing on the build and the community has had
> access to the build with Fusion trunk for a month and a half.
> Instead of trying to backport a set of fixes to Fusion 2.0, Jason
> has suggested we simply do a wholesale replace of Fusion 2.0 from
> Fusion trunk. I agree with his approach as long as we use changeset
> 1887 for Fusion 2.0.
>
> And a wholesale replace is much easier than backporting...
>
> Thanks,
> Trevor
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [hidden email] [mailto:mapguide-
> [hidden email]] On Behalf Of Mike Adair
> Sent: September 22, 2009 7:47 AM
> To: MapGuide Internals Mail List
> Subject: Re: [mapguide-internals] RE: Recent submissions by UV
>
> It would be helpful to know which bugs are critical to be fixed for
> the
> release. There is a long list there now and I don't see them all
> getting fixed soon so if we can get the most important ones marked as
> P1, we can tackle those first.
>
> Mike
>
> Paul Spencer wrote:
>> I'll talk to Mike about taking the current trunk version of fusion
>> over to the 2.0 branch and starting with a 2.0 beta 1 release.
>> Hopefully this will happen tomorrow.
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>> Paul
>>
>> On 2009-09-21, at 4:49 PM, Trevor Wekel wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Jason,
>>>
>>> Since the latest test build contained Fusion trunk, we could say
>>> that
>>> it has already been released to the community. We are bending the
>>> rules a bit but I am ok with calling it RC1. Since RFC 60 needs
>>> official review, I think we should defer it to MGOS 2.2.
>>>
>>> Will this work for an MGOS 2.1 timeline given that the MGOS code
>>> base
>>> has already been released and service packed "elsewhere"?
>>>
>>> - This week MGOS 2.1 RC1
>>> - Week of October 19th MGOS 2.1 Final Release. Note: The RC1 build
>>> may simply be promoted to Final Release if no showstopper defects
>>> are
>>> found.
>>>
>>> I would also like to start producing MGOS 2.2 Beta builds ASAP. I
>>> think it would be good to target October 9th as the date for the
>>> first MGOS 2.2 Beta.
>>>
>>>
>>> I should have RFC 60 reverted in an hour or so.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Trevor
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: [hidden email]
>>> [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of
>>> Jason Birch
>>> Sent: September 21, 2009 2:13 PM
>>> To: MapGuide Internals Mail List
>>> Subject: Re: [mapguide-internals] RE: Recent submissions by UV
>>>
>>> Although I was of the same thought initially, I don' think we can
>>> count on a
>>> Fusion release. My current thought is to release a 2.1 RC with
>>> Fusion
>>> trunk. I hope to be able to get this built today.
>>>
>>> Jason
>>>
>>> 2009/9/21 Andy Morsell <[hidden email]>
>>>
>>>> Regarding the release decision: before we make a decision I think
>>>> that we
>>>> need a date estimate on the Fusion update. I am in the "release
>>>> only when
>>>> Fusion is updated" camp, but I also agree that if we wait much
>>>> longer then
>>>> we are going to have a mutiny on our hands. Also, if RFC 60 is not
>>>> included, what exactly is the impact on the general user community?
>>>>
>>>> Andy
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Trevor Wekel [mailto:[hidden email]]
>>>> Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 9:48 AM
>>>> To: MapGuide Internals Mail List
>>>> Subject: [mapguide-internals] RE: Recent submissions by UV
>>>>
>>>> UV's commit rights were granted under the assumption that he would
>>>> commit
>>>> only to the sandbox. Personally I am disappointed in what has
>>>> happened
>>>> whether it was accidental or otherwise. I can perform the cleanup
>>>> work if
>>>> that is what we want to do.
>>>>
>>>> I think we need to make the call ASAP as to what is going into the
>>>> release.
>>>> Some members of the community are telling us to ship it now, some
>>>> would
>>>> like
>>>> to see RFC 60 implemented, and some would like a Fusion update.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Trevor
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: [hidden email]
>>>> [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of
>>>> Tom
>>>> Fukushima
>>>> Sent: September 21, 2009 9:49 AM
>>>> To: MapGuide Internals Mail List
>>>> Subject: [mapguide-internals] RE: Recent submissions by UV
>>>>
>>>> In order to reduce the amount of work that might be required to
>>>> clean this
>>>> up, I have removed UV's commit rights for now, but will add them
>>>> again once
>>>> we get this cleared up.
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: [hidden email]
>>>> [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of
>>>> Bruce
>>>> Dechant
>>>> Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 9:41 AM
>>>> To: MapGuide Internals Mail List
>>>> Subject: [mapguide-internals] Recent submissions by UV
>>>>
>>>> Hi All,
>>>>
>>>> I thought UV was only supposed to make submissions to his RFC60
>>>> sandbox
>>>> that
>>>> was just created.
>>>> He has just made several submissions to branch/2.1 and not
>>>> sandbox -
>>>> some
>>>> of
>>>> the submissions are RFC60 related and others are not.
>>>>
>>>> Have these submissions been code reviewed? I don't see a trac
>>>> ticket
>>>> for
>>>> any
>>>> of the submissions.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Bruce
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 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
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> mapguide-internals mailing list
>>> [hidden email]
>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapguide-internals
>>
>>
>> __________________________________________
>>
>> Paul Spencer
>> Chief Technology Officer
>> DM Solutions Group Inc
>> http://research.dmsolutions.ca/
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> mapguide-internals mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapguide-internals
>>
>
> --
> Michael Adair
> Senior Software Architect
> DM Solutions Group Inc.
>
> Office: (613) 565-5056 x26
> [hidden email]
> http://www.dmsolutions.ca
> http://research.dmsolutions.ca
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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

RE: Fusion versioning (was Re: RE: Recent submissions by UV)

Reply Threaded

Hi Paul,

The only reason I was considering only using 1887 in the branch is that it had already been released to the community. However, there is a bit of an underlying issue with grabbing Fusion trunk - scope creep. As far as I know, the following 2.2 RFCs do impact Fusion:

RFC 66 Prevent session timeout, and give better error messages
RFC 72 Commercial Map Service Support

It looks as though the RFC 72 work started in April so it is unrealistic to pull these features from (soon to be) Fusion 2.0. It just means that the community may have to do more testing if they are using Fusion. Using 1887 versus tip will not change this so we might as well just use the tip of trunk for Fusion 2.0.

On the plus side, we will effectively get some 2.2 Fusion testing out of the community from the 2.1 release. That's not a bad thing.

Thanks,
Trevor

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Paul Spencer
Sent: September 22, 2009 10:34 AM
To: MapGuide Internals Mail List
Subject: Fusion versioning (was Re: [mapguide-internals] RE: Recent submissions by UV)

Mike is looking at the P1 bugs in trac right now and fixing what he
can today, then we will svn del the fusion 2.0 branch and svn copy
trunk to fusion 2.0 branch (the wholesale change) at the end of the
day. This will form the basis of a fusion 2.0 beta 1 release, but I
think there are a few more bugs that should be looked at before we
actually release a beta (of fusion).

Most of the changes between 1887 and 1903 (the latest one) are related
to fixing autodesk-reported defects which I am sure they will want in
the branch. Is there any particular reason why you don't want to
include changes after 1887?

We will go through the Fusion issue list and try to rejig things into
the right milestones and priorities as soon as we can log into trace.
It will also help if we can get some feedback on which are the highest
priority issues from the mapguide community/developers.

Things that jump out to me are the Measure widget, making sure
anonymous access works properly, commercial layer issues, and some
Legend related issues. Probably any enhancements will be deferred
until after 2.0

Paul

On 2009-09-22, at 11:44 AM, Trevor Wekel wrote: