| | 1 | [wiki:ProjectSteeringCommittee Project Steering Committee - Home] |
| | 2 | |
| | 3 | == Meeting Info == |
| | 4 | |
| | 5 | This meeting of the !MapGuide PSC takes place Thursday, March 31, 2011 at 20:00 UTC (4:00 PM Eastern / 2:00pm Mountain). |
| | 6 | |
| | 7 | Meeting Chair: |
| | 8 | |
| | 9 | PSC Local Times: http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/meetingdetails.html?year=2011&month=3&day=31&hour=20&min=0&sec=0&p1=55&p2=152&p3=736&p4=188 |
| | 10 | |
| | 11 | Location: The meeting will be held on IRC at [irc://irc.freenode.net/mapguide #mapguide] |
| | 12 | |
| | 13 | == Agenda == |
| | 14 | |
| | 15 | * Appoint a Meeting Secretary |
| | 16 | * Ticket #1647 (Zac) |
| | 17 | * RFC 111 (Zac) |
| | 18 | * RFC 69 (Zac) |
| | 19 | * Resourcing and funding for automated builds (Trevor) |
| | 20 | * NUnit versus JUnit for Web Extensions testing (Trevor) |
| | 21 | * Target platforms for !MapGuide 2.3 (Trevor) |
| | 22 | * General discussion on Sponsorship (Trevor) |
| | 23 | * GeoREST (Zac) |
| | 24 | * Disqus to Wiki (Zac) |
| | 25 | |
| | 26 | == Minutes == |
| | 27 | |
| | 28 | PSC Members present: Bob, Bruce, Tom, Haris, Jackie, Zac, Trevor |
| | 29 | |
| | 30 | === Ticket #1647 === |
| | 31 | The King.Oracle Provider is a key component to the 2.2 Release. Hold back the release until ticket is addressed. |
| | 32 | === RFC 111 === |
| | 33 | SVN-enabled directories for Fusion and Ajax should be included in the installer as an option. A new installer |
| | 34 | screen should be added to prompt the user as to whether or not the SVN directories should be installed. |
| | 35 | === RFC 69 === |
| | 36 | Not discussed. |
| | 37 | === Resourcing and funding for automated builds === |
| | 38 | Amazon EC2 should be investigated as an option for build infrastructure. Build automation is not required at this time.[[BR]] |
| | 39 | ACTION: Trevor to investigate Amazon EC2 as an option. |
| | 40 | === NUnit versus JUnit for Web Extensions testing === |
| | 41 | Verification of all three API languages would be preferred. Build automation has been put on hold. |
| | 42 | === Target platforms for !MapGuide 2.3 === |
| | 43 | Current platform support (Ubuntu) should be improved before introducing new platforms.[[BR]] |
| | 44 | ACTION: Zac and Trevor to perform test compilation on Ubuntu 10 (gcc 4.4) 32 bit and 64 bit (time permitting) |
| | 45 | === General discussion on Sponsorship === |
| | 46 | Not discussed. |
| | 47 | === GeoREST === |
| | 48 | Not discussed. |
| | 49 | === Disqus to Wiki === |
| | 50 | Information is easily lost in the mailing lists. A commenting plugin for Trac (Disqus) would be useful.[[BR]] |
| | 51 | ACTION: Zac to check with SAC on including Disqus |
| | 52 | |
| | 53 | === Full transcript === |
| | 54 | |
| | 55 | {{{ |
| | 56 | |
| | 57 | * Now talking in #MapGuide |
| | 58 | * Topic is 'MapGuide Open Source | Home: http://mapguide.osgeo.org/ | Bugs: |
| | 59 | http://trac.osgeo.org/mapguide | See Also: #OSGeo #FDO | Stats: http://www.ohloh.net/proj |
| | 60 | ects/4656 -and- http://cia.navi.cx/stats/project/MapGuide' |
| | 61 | * Set by unknown on Thu May 29 13:24:17 |
| | 62 | * zac has joined #MapGuide |
| | 63 | * BruceD has joined #MapGuide |
| | 64 | <zac> morning! |
| | 65 | <BruceD> hello everyone |
| | 66 | <trevorw> Good morning Zac, good afternoon Bruce |
| | 67 | * rbray has joined #MapGuide |
| | 68 | <trevorw> Zac, will Jackie be able to join? |
| | 69 | <trevorw> Hi Bob |
| | 70 | <zac> yep |
| | 71 | <rbray> Hi Trevor, just so you know I am in a meeting that is running over I will be here |
| | 72 | 100% when I can |
| | 73 | * jng has joined #MapGuide |
| | 74 | <trevorw> Haris and Paul indicated that they should be able to make it. Let's wait |
| | 75 | another minute or two. |
| | 76 | <jng> It's 2003 all over again. The last time I actually remembered how to use irc :P |
| | 77 | <zac> feels like winter in melbourne at this time, brrrr, i'll be cognitive after this |
| | 78 | coffee kicks in |
| | 79 | <trevorw> Does anyone have any agenda items to add? Time permitting, I would like to add |
| | 80 | NUnit and/or JUnit for web extensions unit testing. |
| | 81 | <zac> rfc 111 |
| | 82 | <zac> rfc 69 |
| | 83 | <zac> georest |
| | 84 | <zac> adding disqus to the wiki |
| | 85 | <jng> #1647 being a 2.2 blocker |
| | 86 | * tomf_ has joined #MapGuide |
| | 87 | <trevorw> Ok. That's a big agenda. I can do minutes. Let me do a quick ordering of the |
| | 88 | agenda items. |
| | 89 | <trevorw> Is everyone ok with this order: #1647, RFC 111, RFC 69, Resourcing/Funding |
| | 90 | Automated Builds, NUnit/JUnit, Target Platforms for 2.3, General Sponsorship |
| | 91 | Discussion, GeoREST, Disqus to Wiki |
| | 92 | <BruceD> sure |
| | 93 | <zac> http://trac.osgeo.org/mapguide/ticket/1647 |
| | 94 | <trevorw> The description sounds serious to me. |
| | 95 | <zac> the fix is to select from dual instead of the source table, i think it's a simple |
| | 96 | fix |
| | 97 | <BruceD> Definitely needs fixing |
| | 98 | <jng> Not |
| | 99 | <jng> mapguide's fault but shipping a provider with this serious defect is bad |
| | 100 | <zac> fyi: we discovered it using whilst monitoring the logs using baretail for windows |
| | 101 | <trevorw> So any spatial extents call will basically lock up the provider? |
| | 102 | <jng> Yes |
| | 103 | <jng> Well, let's qualify that |
| | 104 | <jng> Spatial Extents call on any Oracle table of sufficient size (let's say > 1k rows) |
| | 105 | <jng> because that's how many MBRs we get back (the same one too!) |
| | 106 | <trevorw> Yep. That's serious. +1 to hold release. Do we need another release |
| | 107 | candidate? |
| | 108 | <zac> ennoble will test it, i think we can skip a RC |
| | 109 | <trevorw> Sounds good. I can roll the provider binaries into the final build. |
| | 110 | <BruceD> eta on when this will be fixed? |
| | 111 | <jng> haris could tell us, we emailed him a detailed solution for the problem |
| | 112 | <BruceD> hopefully soon as this release has been delay long enough |
| | 113 | <zac> while we are waiting, here's the results of the survey http://dev-eap.ennoble.com.a |
| | 114 | u/survey.zip |
| | 115 | <trevorw> Haris is having trouble with IRC (new PC) |
| | 116 | * HarisK has joined #MapGuide |
| | 117 | <HarisK> hi, sorry for being late |
| | 118 | <trevorw> Hi Haris, we are discussing http://trac.osgeo.org/mapguide/ticket/1647 |
| | 119 | <HarisK> I read email and quickly looked at code and unitests |
| | 120 | <HarisK> don't have answer, but i believe i should be able to do it tommorow |
| | 121 | <trevorw> Perfect! Sounds like we should hold the 2.2 release for it. |
| | 122 | <trevorw> +1 wait for 1647 |
| | 123 | <zac> +1 |
| | 124 | <jng> +1 |
| | 125 | <BruceD> +1 |
| | 126 | <HarisK> +1 |
| | 127 | <trevorw> Next agenda item RFC 111 |
| | 128 | <trevorw> Zac, can you give us an update? |
| | 129 | <zac> http://trac.osgeo.org/mapguide/wiki/MapGuideRfc111 |
| | 130 | <zac> so there's been discussions on users and internals |
| | 131 | <zac> i ran the survery |
| | 132 | <zac> http://dev-eap.ennoble.com.au/survey.zip |
| | 133 | <zac> 29 responses, most users know subversion |
| | 134 | <zac> 78% are in favour of this approach |
| | 135 | <zac> plus the main developer for fusion |
| | 136 | <zac> a few people want zip files or a exe installer which only does basic merging |
| | 137 | <zac> i would suggest the other options require more work and are not as complete, |
| | 138 | nothing blocks the other solutions being implemented |
| | 139 | <trevorw> if we go with this approach i would personally prefer to keep the .svn |
| | 140 | directories out of the installers and release an .svn zip file along with the |
| | 141 | installers. |
| | 142 | <zac> in addtion, we require any patches as subversions diffs, why expect our users not |
| | 143 | to enjoy the same ease of use |
| | 144 | <tomf_> What's the reason for keeping the .svn files out of the installers? Security? |
| | 145 | <zac> it can be an install flag, on be default i'd suggest |
| | 146 | <HarisK> .svn files would be some option to install ? users will have option of "plain" |
| | 147 | install without need to hear about svn ? |
| | 148 | <trevorw> it doubles the size of the install set. I suspect there would be no security |
| | 149 | issues. |
| | 150 | <zac> even if the users don't use svn, it makes no impact on use.. we can add a rule to |
| | 151 | block .svn dirs via apache |
| | 152 | <jng> Modding the wix installer would be a PITA (it prefers install features grouped by |
| | 153 | directories) .svn directories being all over the shop is a bit of a monkey wrench. |
| | 154 | Doesn't mean it's impossible tho |
| | 155 | <tomf_> My preference is to install them (no option not to) if size is the only concern. |
| | 156 | <zac> text files compress well :) |
| | 157 | <jng> What's the scope of retaining .svn directories? |
| | 158 | <trevorw> one quick question - does svn care about the root directory structure? the |
| | 159 | installed web directory structure is not the same as oem/fusion + web/src |
| | 160 | <jng> I'm just sampling the .svn size of the stuff we want to retain svn awareness |
| | 161 | (mapadmin/mapviewernet/mapviewerphp/mapviewerjsp/schemareport/stdicons/viewerfiles) |
| | 162 | <zac> we can drop a .svn folder in the root web dir with only certain directories under |
| | 163 | svn |
| | 164 | <jng> The combined size of these .svn dirs is negligible |
| | 165 | <HarisK> i understand .svn files as developers stuff and I think that we would need just |
| | 166 | standard user installation of MG |
| | 167 | <trevorw> the proposal is to include the .svn directories in the installer (please |
| | 168 | correct me if i am wrong) |
| | 169 | <jng> yes |
| | 170 | <tomf_> Users who don't want to use .svn can ignore them. Developers can use them. |
| | 171 | <jng> non-svn users won't notice any difference |
| | 172 | <zac> this RFC will really help the project, allowing us to release more often (tm) |
| | 173 | <trevorw> other questions? are we ok to vote? |
| | 174 | <HarisK> we have couple of larger enterprise customers and there is no way we could |
| | 175 | update there trough .svn and i don't think their admin would like it either |
| | 176 | <HarisK> just my 2 cents |
| | 177 | <jng> I assume MGE uses a separate installer packaging process |
| | 178 | <zac> ok, but then you simply don't use it? |
| | 179 | <tomf_> I doubt that MGE would install the .svn files |
| | 180 | <zac> shall we vote? |
| | 181 | <trevorw> hmm... some admins might not like the extra stuff hanging around. An installer |
| | 182 | optioned turned off by default? |
| | 183 | <HarisK> MGE ? I ment larger companies which uses MG OS |
| | 184 | <zac> on by default |
| | 185 | <HarisK> and admins in those companies don't like some extra stuff |
| | 186 | <HarisK> yes trewor, that was my point |
| | 187 | <jng> Is the attack surface being expanded by including .svn directories? Is this the |
| | 188 | concern? |
| | 189 | <HarisK> sorry for name typo, Trevor |
| | 190 | <trevorw> i think it's a FUD argument. don't know what it is, don't like it. |
| | 191 | <zac> @jng no because it's open source and we can hide them via webserver rules |
| | 192 | <trevorw> how about .svn option off by default - this is current behaviour. |
| | 193 | <zac> but most users like this feature, fussy admins can disable it |
| | 194 | <jng> that's acceptable for me. It's just one check of the tickbox. We're not all *that* |
| | 195 | lazy! |
| | 196 | <trevorw> 3rd party ISVs may have their own copy of the web directories under their own |
| | 197 | svn (or other version control) tree as well. |
| | 198 | <tomf_> I haven't been convinced to move from my original position of installign them. |
| | 199 | We could provide a script for those few who want to remove them |
| | 200 | <HarisK> we do a lot of development but still, I really can't see us updating MG trough |
| | 201 | svn on working customer site |
| | 202 | <HarisK> I can see doing that on test/development sites |
| | 203 | <zac> those 3rd parties are already doing post install mods |
| | 204 | <BruceD> @Haris agree |
| | 205 | <trevorw> sounds like svn dirs are useful for dev/test machines only. option off by |
| | 206 | default? |
| | 207 | <zac> most installs are dev test anyway right? target the base |
| | 208 | <zac> every production server i maintain, code is deployed only thru subversion |
| | 209 | <rbray> personally I'd never use this on a production server, dev/test servers yea it's a |
| | 210 | great idea |
| | 211 | <zac> so lets make it a individual installer screen? |
| | 212 | <rbray> but I am fine with the concept of an option in the installer - don't really care |
| | 213 | which way it defaults |
| | 214 | <trevorw> installer option off by default to maintain existing behaviour? |
| | 215 | <trevorw> and I like the separate screen idea. |
| | 216 | <HarisK> +1 |
| | 217 | <BruceD> +1 |
| | 218 | <rbray> +1 |
| | 219 | <trevorw> +1 |
| | 220 | <jng> +1 |
| | 221 | <zac> +1 |
| | 222 | <tomf_> +0 |
| | 223 | <trevorw> Do we have time for another agenda item? |
| | 224 | <zac> we can gauge the feedback during RC's on the default option |
| | 225 | <HarisK> i have time |
| | 226 | <zac> yep |
| | 227 | <BruceD> I can stay |
| | 228 | <jng> sure |
| | 229 | <zac> let's talk builds next? |
| | 230 | <trevorw> http://trac.osgeo.org/mapguide/wiki/MapGuideRfc69 was next up |
| | 231 | <trevorw> We can goto build next if you like zac |
| | 232 | <zac> i think if we have time constraints, builds are more important |
| | 233 | <trevorw> Ok. Resourcing / Funding for Automated builds |
| | 234 | <zac> my thoughts on the linux builds is, lets fix the builds rather than support so many |
| | 235 | platform builds? |
| | 236 | <zac> 90% plus of cloud servers run ubuntu right? |
| | 237 | <trevorw> Yes. We currently support CentOS/RHEL 5 and Ubuntu 9. Ubuntu 10 is |
| | 238 | problematic with 2.2 due to 3rd party dependencies. 2.3 may be better. |
| | 239 | <zac> is the GSC work salavageable? |
| | 240 | <trevorw> I believe Bruce may have looked at it as part of the 3rd party upgrades in 2.3. |
| | 241 | <trevorw> (berkeley db/xml mostly) |
| | 242 | <zac> vs2010 support comes in there as well right? |
| | 243 | <BruceD> that is lots more work |
| | 244 | <BruceD> 2010 compiler support that is |
| | 245 | <BruceD> 2010 ide is not an issue |
| | 246 | <trevorw> bruce - do you know if oem compiles with gcc 4.4? (Ubuntu 10, RHEL 6) |
| | 247 | <zac> perhaps a 3.0 goal, we should just push 2.3 out soon... |
| | 248 | <BruceD> dont know have not tried those distros |
| | 249 | <zac> i'm on 10.10 64-bit here currently, haven't tried a build tho |
| | 250 | <trevorw> ok. native gcc 4.4 would be good for Ubuntu. 64 bit linux would be good too. |
| | 251 | For timelines, I was thinking september for MG 2.3 to put us in the running for FOSS4G |
| | 252 | 2011 |
| | 253 | <trevorw> i guess we will have to perform test compiles on those platforms to see how |
| | 254 | close we are. |
| | 255 | <zac> are all 2.3 RFC's completed? |
| | 256 | <zac> quickplot has already bled into 2.3 |
| | 257 | <zac> i mean snuck into 2.2 |
| | 258 | <trevorw> Build question - do we want automated builds? |
| | 259 | <trevorw> zac, can you and I take test builds for Linux platform support as a task item |
| | 260 | for next meeting? |
| | 261 | <zac> sure |
| | 262 | <trevorw> Ok. Great. that should put us in better shape to answer the platforms question. |
| | 263 | <trevorw> For automated builds - do we want to expend the effort to do them? |
| | 264 | <zac> only needed for server/api mods, i'd suggest occasional builds, less problems... |
| | 265 | i.e. an RFC is completed |
| | 266 | <trevorw> Yes. They do not have to be daily. Should they be automated? |
| | 267 | <trevorw> (ie. not built by hand) |
| | 268 | <zac> i'd say it's your call trevor, as your doing the work.. |
| | 269 | <trevorw> True. OTX Systems has about $10k invested in hardware and software licenses |
| | 270 | and another $4k/year in ISP fees. |
| | 271 | <trevorw> without additional resources/funding, it will be difficult for me to provide |
| | 272 | build automation. |
| | 273 | <trevorw> I've been looking into corporate sponsorship for MGOS. But I do not believe we |
| | 274 | (the PSC) have decided where to allocate any funding we get. |
| | 275 | <tomf_> Has there been any investigation in looking at cloud solutions for compiling? It |
| | 276 | seems that would reduce the hardware costs at least. |
| | 277 | <trevorw> Did a quick compare with Connectria. $9k/year for the VMs we are running. |
| | 278 | <trevorw> (6 VMs, 225GB disk, 7GB ram) |
| | 279 | <trevorw> Hardware + software is half, ISP is the other half. |
| | 280 | <zac> how come a normal ADSL wouldn't suffice? |
| | 281 | <zac> http://trac.osgeo.org/mapguide/wiki/MapGuideRfc111 (updated with votes and the |
| | 282 | optional installer info) |
| | 283 | <trevorw> a typical ADSL line is only 1 Mbit/sec (100 kbytes/sec). That would only |
| | 284 | handle one VPN user for the builds. Builds downloads would be very slow. |
| | 285 | <trevorw> (20+ minutes for an installer exe) |
| | 286 | <trevorw> If we are not doing regular builds, and there is no build collaboration, a 1 |
| | 287 | Mbit line might be workable. |
| | 288 | <zac> s3 is always an option for downloads, 10c a gig for t/f - 14c for storage |
| | 289 | <tomf_> With something like Amazon Web Service, there is the option of running the VMs |
| | 290 | only when they are required; no paying when they aren't required. If we are only doing |
| | 291 | builds once in a while that could save on costs. |
| | 292 | <zac> ennoble will host on s3 |
| | 293 | <zac> the hardware exists already? |
| | 294 | <tomf_> S3 is good, also posting onto the download site on OSGeo.org would work wouldn't |
| | 295 | it? |
| | 296 | <trevorw> Yes. The hardware is in my basement. The VMs are already set up. I already |
| | 297 | have a ~5Mbit line. |
| | 298 | <trevorw> A build mirror would work. Nightly (even weekly) builds would be too much |
| | 299 | volume for OSGeo. |
| | 300 | <zac> using amazon cloudfront is an option, dead simple CDN mirror |
| | 301 | <trevorw> The hardware should be ok for another year. |
| | 302 | <jng> wrt frequency I like zac's suggestion of occasional builds |
| | 303 | <jng> It'd be like preview releases for Maestro |
| | 304 | <zac> on sponsorship, how about adding an info/support the project page to the installer? |
| | 305 | <jng> installer ui or start menu/desktop links? |
| | 306 | <zac> definately not on the desktop, otherwise yes |
| | 307 | <trevorw> should I write up an RFC on using sponsorship funding for builds infrastructure? |
| | 308 | <jng> I think there's a perception problem |
| | 309 | <jng> I think most users think free as in beer instead of free as in speech |
| | 310 | <jng> We need to drive home the point that Open Source != a free lunch |
| | 311 | <trevorw> I can detail the hardware/software/isp costs for doing the builds in the rfc |
| | 312 | <trevorw> do we want to estimate person time to maintain the builds? |
| | 313 | <rbray> trevor, I also think Tom's idea of using Amazon on demand instances is a good one |
| | 314 | to explore |
| | 315 | <trevorw> bob, does Amazon support Windows images? |
| | 316 | <rbray> yes |
| | 317 | <zac> yep, twice the price of linux instances |
| | 318 | <rbray> still for a 2 hour build it's cheap |
| | 319 | <rbray> and no hardware to maintain |
| | 320 | <rbray> ISP costs |
| | 321 | <rbray> etc |
| | 322 | <zac> using an ebs image you just fire it up as required, only pay for the storage of the |
| | 323 | ebs volume |
| | 324 | <trevorw> If we are only doing sporadic builds, it would work. The personnel cost to set |
| | 325 | it up could be signficant depending on the level of automation. |
| | 326 | <trevorw> Does Amazon offer backup? |
| | 327 | <rbray> even if you build twice a week or even daily - I think it would save big $$$ |
| | 328 | <zac> yep, snapshots are available |
| | 329 | <trevorw> No. Not snapshots. Backup on separate disk. |
| | 330 | <HarisK> I am using amazon for MapGuide on Windows and have very positive experience |
| | 331 | <zac> you can copy the images to another EBS volume or on s3 |
| | 332 | <trevorw> I think it can take anywhere from 1 to 3 days to set up a single build VM |
| | 333 | (install software, etc). |
| | 334 | <trevorw> I will look into Amazon. |
| | 335 | <zac> i'm not sure if it helps, but as a MS partner, i have a free copy of 2008 server we |
| | 336 | could use, not sure if BYO makes EC2 cheaper or if my license allows it |
| | 337 | <trevorw> OTX Systems has already purchased a Win 2008 Server and Win 2008 Web license |
| | 338 | for the build infrastructure. |
| | 339 | <zac> ok, shall we move on to junit v nunit? |
| | 340 | <trevorw> Ok. If we were going to do build automation with Cruise Control (java or |
| | 341 | .net), there is native support for running unit tests with junit or nunit. |
| | 342 | <trevorw> Which would be preferable if we were going to rewrite the web extensions unit |
| | 343 | tests? |
| | 344 | <BruceD> Either one would work for me |
| | 345 | <jng> .net/nunit for me |
| | 346 | <trevorw> Do we also need to run the unit tests on both Windows and Linux? |
| | 347 | <zac> preferrably |
| | 348 | <BruceD> Doing this helps validate on both platforms |
| | 349 | <jng> I assume we're testing the robustness of the web extensions regardless of wrapper |
| | 350 | language and not the wrapper itself? |
| | 351 | <zac> (aside: go Jackie on the recent response on the mailing list) |
| | 352 | <trevorw> both - the wrapper is a fair bit of generated code and their are platform |
| | 353 | differences. Perhaps we need both nunit and junit for better coverage? |
| | 354 | <zac> would it help to have a php/.net/.jsp page which runs the tests in their own |
| | 355 | language? |
| | 356 | <trevorw> Then we need to install and configure a webserver too. nunit/junit could run |
| | 357 | out of the box without it. |
| | 358 | <trevorw> maybe use nunit on Windows as the primary "unit test platform" and port the |
| | 359 | tests to junit/linux time permitting? |
| | 360 | <jng> Is a webserver necessary? |
| | 361 | <trevorw> webserver is not required for junit/nunit |
| | 362 | <jng> MG API is usable outside the webserver provided webconfig.ini/MgInitializeWebTier |
| | 363 | setup is performed before doing anything |
| | 364 | <trevorw> ok. sounds like we would prefer coverage for all three api languages. |
| | 365 | <trevorw> should we bump the rest of the agenda items to the next meeting? |
| | 366 | <zac> just very quickly, any thoughts on the disqus for the wiki/doco ? |
| | 367 | <zac> similiar to what adobe does |
| | 368 | <zac> http://help.adobe.com/en_US/ColdFusion/9.0/CFMLRef/WSc3ff6d0ea77859461172e0811cbec1 |
| | 369 | bb49-7fc4.html |
| | 370 | <trevorw> are we replacing trac? |
| | 371 | <zac> it's just a js plugin which allows commenting |
| | 372 | <zac> like 10 lines of template code |
| | 373 | <zac> stuff get's lost on the mailing list rather quickly |
| | 374 | <trevorw> we would probably have to get OSGeo SAC to approve it if we wanted to use it. |
| | 375 | <trevorw> agree with the mailing list comment... |
| | 376 | <zac> i think it would be good to capture doco requests |
| | 377 | <HarisK> just a late remark on build/test topic, sorry i was out of office |
| | 378 | <BruceD> I'm fine with it and agree with the mailing list issue |
| | 379 | <HarisK> that we don't put much more effort into build-test-integration toools |
| | 380 | <BruceD> Anyways sorry I have to run |
| | 381 | <HarisK> while it seems development rate is quite low recently |
| | 382 | <BruceD> Nice chatting with you all again :) |
| | 383 | <HarisK> thanks |
| | 384 | <trevorw> thanks bruce |
| | 385 | <BruceD> Bye |
| | 386 | * BruceD Quit (Quit: ChatZilla 0.9.86 [Firefox |
| | 387 | 3.5.14/20101001172330]) |
| | 388 | <zac> an example http://www.exploreaustralia.net.au/Victoria/Grampians-and-Central-West/G |
| | 389 | rampians-National-Park see the comments tab |
| | 390 | <zac> @Harris I agree |
| | 391 | * jng Quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds) |
| | 392 | * jng has joined #MapGuide |
| | 393 | <zac> do we really need to ping the SAC to include javascript on our wiki pages? |
| | 394 | <trevorw> i do not know. does trac allow javascript to be embedded? |
| | 395 | <jng> @zac, It does sound like an OSGeo infrastructure problem |
| | 396 | <zac> dunno, we use jira for work... it's just templates right... Jackie you've played |
| | 397 | with trac before? |
| | 398 | * rbray Quit |
| | 399 | <zac> ok, i'll follow that up with the SAC |
| | 400 | <trevorw> Ok. shall we adjourn? |
| | 401 | <HarisK> I need to go as well |
| | 402 | <HarisK> thank you all |
| | 403 | <trevorw> thanks haris |
| | 404 | <HarisK> and thanks for organising it |
| | 405 | <jng> thanks from me too |
| | 406 | <zac> cheers Trevor et al! |
| | 407 | <trevorw> cheers! |
| | 408 | |
| | 409 | }}} |
