Page Operations
Browse Space19:36 camerons: Lets start.
19:36 stvn: k
19:36 Cappelaere: who is pulse?
19:36 camerons: Anything to add to the agenda emailed out?
19:36 Cappelaere: nope
19:37 stvn: nope
19:37 camerons: Ok, 1.0RC2:
19:37 stvn: documentation means both documentation in general and the codehaus site?
19:37 camerons: Your call steven?
19:38 camerons: Lets focus on RC2 first so Matt can leave after that if he wants to.
19:38 stvn: if peter joins later on just documentation, otherwise the site, since I've not payed attention to the docs so far
19:38 stvn: k
19:38 camerons: Is anyone working on RC2 apart from Mike?
19:39 Cappelaere: nope
19:39 camerons: I'm sure he could do with some help.
19:39 stvn: nope
19:39 Cappelaere: I need to resync it and check it again aainst fitnesse...!!! have not done it yet
19:40 Cappelaere: been busy with RssLayers...
19:40 camerons: Mike emailed to say he hasn't had much time to work on RC2, but will get to it next week.
19:40 camerons: Pat, I'm in 2 minds about adding tests to RC2.
19:40 * stvn needs to do the same, but been busy with the site, I'll see what I can do this weekend, but I want the site moving as well
19:41 Cappelaere: ??
19:41 Cappelaere: I was not thinking of adding tests
19:41 camerons: Steven, we usually have 2 weeks or so after the code freezes before we get the build out due to bugs we find during the build process.
19:42 camerons: So after to get docs to a reasonable level you might want to focus on RC2, then come back and polish docs after.
19:43 stvn: k
19:43 Cappelaere: I wouldneed to do the same
19:43 camerons: Pat: You are welcome to add tests if you want, but we should make sure we don't waste too much effort on the 1.0 branch.
19:44 Cappelaere: no addition just run what I have so far
19:44 Cappelaere: there was enoughg issues
19:44 camerons: The 1.0 branch has been completed, all we are doing is fixing up glowing bugs.
19:44 stvn: if we skip the fitnesse tests, I probably can get to RC2 sooner, since I still haven't set up fitnesse
19:44 Cappelaere: I will take car of running the tests. Don't worry about it
19:44 mattdiez: Do I need to perform an additional 1.0 branch build?
19:44 mattdiez: Or, am I working exclusively on RC2?
19:45 camerons: Steven, I'd prefer it if you focused on fitness after rc2.
19:45 camerons: Matt, we are creating 1.0rc2, I've been abbreviating.
19:46 stvn: camerons: no probs
19:46 camerons: We won't put out 1.0 until we have a RC without any major bugs.
19:47 camerons: I've created a branches/1.0 directory which is where all RC2 work should be applied.
19:48 camerons: Initially any fixes that have been applied to the trunk should be copied across.
19:48 stvn: there are 5 major bugs open in jira AFAIK, one of them is a jira related one, two of them I can solve/are solved AFAIK in my setup
19:48 camerons: Consider using "svn join" for copying - but you don't have to.
19:49 stvn: i'm not sure what to do with the jira bug http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MAP-1
19:49 camerons: looking ...
19:50 stvn: I can loo into map-4 and map-6 which I believe originate from my company and are fixed internally
19:50 camerons: JIRA 1 is complete, I'll see if i can close it.
19:50 camerons: Excellent, that will be great.
19:51 camerons: Can you assign the bugs to yourself so that Mike knows not to fix them.
19:51 stvn: will try
19:52 stvn: wow that went easy 
19:53 camerons: I've just closed map1
19:53 stvn: i'll do 12 as well
19:54 camerons: There may be some other bugs in the MINOR catagory which need fixing too.
19:54 stvn: 20 is an important one
19:54 camerons: I have not checked their status.
19:55 stvn: how can I change priority?
19:55 camerons: Feel free to change it's status to MAJOR.
19:55 stvn: it's the one that prevents panning in FF1.5 (it includes the fix though)
19:55 camerons: Select the BUG, then EDIT, then change the priority.
19:56 stvn: found it
19:56 camerons: You have a fix?
19:56 stvn: it is included
19:57 stvn: john, who filed the bug, found the solution after a discussion with me
19:57 camerons: Ok.
19:57 camerons: What about 19?
19:57 stvn: a rather illusive one
19:58 Cappelaere: Ihis.doc?
19:58 mattdiez: Intemittent, hence the worst kind.
19:58 Cappelaere: I can replicate it consitently
19:58 Cappelaere: I can probably fix it
19:58 mattdiez: IE, flush cache, reload?
19:58 Cappelaere: yes
19:58 mattdiez: Yes.
19:58 camerons: yes. Sounds like the problem of "first load".
19:59 mattdiez: That's exactly it.
19:59 camerons: I'm changing priority to Major.
19:59 Cappelaere: k
19:59 stvn: Cappelaere: would be nice, so far I haven't found the real cause of it, I know that checking for this.doc everywhere is a solution though
19:59 Cappelaere: agree
20:00 stvn: is 17 not the same/related?
20:00 Cappelaere: not sure
20:01 camerons: Do you know the fix to 13 Steven?
20:02 Cappelaere: I think it is a typo in the css
20:02 stvn: not yet, but it's my kind of beef, so I assigned it to myself
20:02 stvn: doesn't look like a complex one
20:02 camerons: Note, if we have duplicates, you can close one of the bugs. Make sure you reference the open bug.
20:02 Cappelaere: can we consolidate the css files?
20:03 stvn: Cappelaere: I will look into it, I've yet to find out what docStyle.css does
20:03 camerons: 13 would be nice to fix because I think it is causing JS errors - which is not a sign of a stable project.
20:03 stvn: it is not used by mapbuilder itself
20:04 Cappelaere: ??
20:04 camerons: Cleaning up CSS doesn't need to be fixed in 1.0, just bugs.
20:04 stvn: camerons: I've assigned all openwerelds' reports to me and the 'easy' css ones
20:04 camerons: thanks steven.
20:04 stvn: Cappelaere: my idea exactly, didn't dare to touch it though
20:05 Cappelaere: k
20:06 stvn: bug 54 seems to be solved by mike
20:07 camerons: Ok, so it only needs to be copied to 1.0 from the trunk?
20:07 camerons: Note, when you fix a bug, you can assign which build it was fixed in.
20:07 stvn: ask mike first
20:07 stvn: k
20:08 Cappelaere: 50 is a hardone sine it depends on being xhtml compliant and willonly work on FF1.5
20:08 Cappelaere: unless we use the adobe plugin on IE I guess
20:08 Cappelaere: still going to be 1.1 or later
20:09 Cappelaere: I can close 40
20:09 camerons: Yes, 50 is a new feature, so won't be in 1.0
20:10 stvn: Cappelaere: <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd">
20:10 stvn: standard compliance mode in FF1.5 with mapbiulder \o/
20:10 Cappelaere: #41?
20:10 stvn: so standard compliance is just one commit away
20:10 camerons: 40 is fixed in rc1? Or you still need to fix it?
20:11 Cappelaere: I will check on it on rc2
20:11 Cappelaere: I fixed it in the trunk
20:11 stvn: Cappelaere: it is indeed 41, didn't spot it, I'll fix the bug
20:11 camerons: #41 can stay MINOR. I'd suggest you fix it in the trunk.
20:12 Cappelaere: assigned to stvn then?
20:12 camerons: But you are welcome to fix in 1.0 as well if you want to.
20:12 stvn: camerons: it might be solved as a side effect of some major bugs though 
20:12 camerons: ok
20:12 stvn: Cappelaere: yes
20:13 Cappelaere: are we going to have index.xhtml files?
20:13 Cappelaere: to force FF to recognize them as such (and SVG will be enabled)
20:13 camerons: Sorry, I meant #40. #41 would be great to fix for 1.0.
20:13 Cappelaere: #40 1.0 got it
20:14 Cappelaere: I will assign it to myself
20:14 camerons: Thanks Pat.
20:16 stvn: k I believe I can resolve the 8 bugs I assigned to myself this coming week
20:16 camerons: JIRA has a great "Roadmap" feature that we can use.
20:16 camerons: Pat, it is possible Linda might want to work out how to use it.
20:16 Cappelaere: ?
20:17 Cappelaere: what do you want her to do?
20:17 camerons: I think it is just a cass of assigning bugs to a particular release, then you click on the Roadmap function and it traces how many of those bugs have been addresed.
20:18 camerons: So you can see that we have completed 60% of the bugs for rc2.
20:19 Cappelaere: I will ask her
20:19 Cappelaere: np
20:19 * stvn wonders what the components bit means
20:19 camerons: Pat, I'll have a look later.
20:20 stvn: camerons: you just assign the fix version in the edit-bug
20:20 camerons: ok
20:20 stvn: I just put a bug on rc2
20:20 camerons: Steven, JIRA allows you to create components. Eg, we could have Widgets, Models, and Tools.
20:21 camerons: And you can assign bugs to a particular component.
20:21 stvn: k
20:21 camerons: Useful when you have different teams working on each components.
20:22 camerons: Anything else to discuss regarding Bugs?
20:22 mattdiez: Yes.
20:22 stvn: I'd say we all assign our bugs to the proper release
20:23 mattdiez: I'm perusing the bug situation, do we have no movie-loop related bugs?
20:23 camerons: Steven, good idea. Initially we can do a group assign of all MAJOR bugs to rc2.
20:23 stvn: movie-loop?
20:23 camerons: for time series.
20:24 camerons: Best to ask Mike that question.
20:24 mattdiez: Yeah, are there any bugs listed there? I can't seem to find any...
20:24 mattdiez: perhaps using the wrong keywords.
20:24 camerons: Matt, have you noticed bugs with the Time Series?
20:25 mattdiez: cameron: quite a few, been too busy to input them.
20:25 Cappelaere: I remember something... but not sure what
20:25 mattdiez: f'rinstance, toggle a layer on/off during animation.
20:25 camerons: Matt, it is possible the bugs are on SF and haven't been copied across.
20:25 Cappelaere: when you play with it too much it gets wacky
20:25 mattdiez: throws relatively ugly errors.
20:25 mattdiez: k. I'll look into it this weekend.
20:25 camerons: Closed bugs on SF were not copied accross.
20:26 mattdiez: Honestly, timeseries probably needs a pure-javascript (no XSL) rewrite.
20:26 Cappelaere:
20:26 camerons: Matt, do you have a vested interest in Time Series?
20:27 camerons: (Appart from it looking really cool)
20:27 mattdiez: absolutely, unfortunately, I'm probably the weakest here in terms of Javascript skills.
20:27 Cappelaere: I am kinda of interested to see my ships moving as a function of time...
20:28 Cappelaere: and do real-time geotracing...
20:28 stvn: your ships...
20:28 Cappelaere: Captain Pat!
20:28 Cappelaere: lol
20:28 camerons: Matt, it would be great to fix the Time Series bugs, but I don't see it as core functionality so it is not critical to fix for rc2 if it is going to take too long.
20:28 stvn: cap' Cappelaere
20:28 Cappelaere: lol
20:29 camerons: Steven, it would be kind of fun to have an animated gif of a timeseries in the Mapbuilder screen shots.
20:29 mattdiez: Well, I can't even begin to estimate the effort involved in fixing it.
20:29 mattdiez: There are a couple issues, for example, do =all= layers animate at the same time?
20:30 stvn: camerons: I can make screenrecordings at work and produce flash/movie and maybe animated GIF
20:30 mattdiez: But, let's make this a discussion for another time.
20:30 stvn: of about anything which is on screen
20:30 Cappelaere: woul dbe nice
20:30 camerons: Steven, it would be a lower priority than RC1 and other docs.
20:30 stvn: indeed
20:30 Cappelaere: no fun
20:30 stvn: I've put the livedemo on the site after 1.0 release as well
20:31 Cappelaere: but that woul dnot be live
20:31 camerons: Matt, for the moment can you please raise any Time series bugs that are not listed yet.
20:31 stvn: Cappelaere: if it makes you happy I do have some movies of mapbuilder actions lying around on my HDD
20:32 camerons: Anything else to discuss regarding Bugs?
20:32 stvn: not me
20:32 Cappelaere: nope
20:32 camerons: Matt, do you have anything you would like to say regarding the build process?
20:33 mattdiez: I'll probably have more to offer once I start up the process.
20:33 camerons: Matt, Are you interested in converting the build documentation to a confluence page?
20:34 mattdiez: And, then, invariably, run into roadblocks...
20:34 camerons: ok
20:34 mattdiez: Is the intent to abandon docbook?
20:34 camerons: Matt, yes.
20:34 mattdiez: Task it to me, then.
20:34 stvn: great
20:35 camerons: thanks Matt.
20:35 Cappelaere: so are we saying all doc will be on confluence?
20:35 camerons: Pat, I think we should head that way.
20:35 stvn: I'm in favour to have all doc available form one source, with the condition that it is navigatable (which I'm trying to do)
20:36 camerons: I love docbook, but users don't seem to update the docbook, so docs get out of date.
20:36 Cappelaere: is it repackageable for a build?
20:36 mattdiez: cam: didn't you help develop docbook?
20:36 Cappelaere: so a user could have a local copy?
20:37 camerons: I didn't write docbook, but I've written tools which use docbook.
20:37 camerons: http://generguide.sf.net
20:37 camerons: (An old abandoned project of mine)
20:37 mattdiez: Gotcha.
20:38 stvn: Cappelaere: checking for export functionality in #codehaus now
20:38 camerons: Pat, we don't need to move all our docs over immediately, but as we update them we should move over to confluence.
20:38 stvn: I'll see if I can find out if and how to export confluence
20:39 Cappelaere: agree
20:39 camerons: I've heard confluence has a PDF export.
20:39 camerons: If we want to use it.
20:39 Cappelaere: would be nice
20:39 stvn: will see
20:40 camerons: anything else for RC2?
20:41 camerons: Steven, do you want to discuss documentation?
20:41 stvn: I'd say the foundation has priority
20:41 stvn: there's not much to tell really
20:41 camerons: Topic: Geospatial Foundation:
20:42 Cappelaere: is Chris Holmes online?
20:42 camerons: I tried to get a place at the settup meeting, but all 25 spots have been filled.
20:42 stvn: I joined #geospatial today and discussed a bit about this document:
20:43 camerons: Not sure, I don't have Chris's IM details.
20:43 stvn: http://mrcc.com/~gsherman/Foundation_Governance_Doc.pdf
20:43 Cappelaere: I see a chris user (nicknamed pulse)
20:43 camerons: I haven't got to that doc yet.
20:44 mattdiez: Pat is a pirate and a detective.
20:44 Cappelaere: I am keeping my left eye open!!!!
20:45 camerons:
20:45 camerons: The key issues I want addressed are:
20:45 camerons: 1. Our PMC retains control of our project and who is on our PMC.
20:46 camerons: 2. Our code is not as mature as some of the other projects. If a level of maturity is set as a criteria for entry, then we might not make it.
20:47 camerons: 3. I don't think licence is an issue. So long as we are an OSI license.
20:48 Cappelaere: But why not fold under Apache?
20:48 Cappelaere: why do we need another foundation?
20:48 camerons: We would have to use the Apache license.
20:48 stvn: Cappelaere: the main reason is probably because this one is foccused on GIS/webmapping
20:48 Cappelaere: so
20:48 camerons: Steven, yes.
20:49 Cappelaere: it is also funded by Autodesk
20:49 camerons: And this foundation will focus on getting money from Geospatail sponsors, and promoting Geospatial issues.
20:49 camerons: Other foundations wouldn't have that directive.
20:50 stvn: Cappelaere: yeah, but the governance doc seems to be rather valid and OSS minded
20:51 stvn: Cappelaere: it could be that autodesk saw the light, more companies have done so, besides we still retain the protection of an OSS license, so if worst happens we still have our own code
20:51 Cappelaere: this would also kill mapbuilder.com
20:51 camerons: Depends what you want Mapbuilder.com for.
20:52 Cappelaere: one source of revenue is dual licensing
20:52 Cappelaere: this would b eowned by the foundation
20:52 Cappelaere: you are left with pure services
20:52 camerons: The foundation would not need to own our code.
20:52 camerons: They are not insisting on that.
20:52 Cappelaere: read A
20:53 Cappelaere: they would own the license
20:53 Cappelaere: and rely on revenue from dual licensing
20:54 Cappelaere: top paragraph page 3
20:54 camerons: Based on email lists, it is not realistically feasable to turn ownership of code over to the Foundation because the ownership is streched across 100s of authors - some who are now uncontactable.
20:55 camerons: Mapbuilder is still young and we could potentially hand ownership of our code to the foundation if we want to.
20:55 Cappelaere: better ask that question then
20:55 stvn: I think it's not going to happen indeed, but if it would happen I don't think I'm in favour of joining gsf
20:56 camerons: Who should own our code?
20:56 mattdiez: (i gotta run, gents)
20:56 camerons: We say "The PMC owns the code" but this doesn't have any legal standing. In reality, the code is owned by the authors who contributed the code.
20:56 stvn: 20:54 stvn: hm, is the GSF going to own the code the projects will have?
20:56 stvn: 20:55 <@TylerM*: stvn: I think that will be required, if the foundation is going
20:56 stvn: to be providing any type of legal shielding for developers,
20:56 stvn: know what I mean?
20:56 camerons: ok, thanks for coming Matt,
20:57 mattdiez: ciao
20:57 ! mattdiez [n=mattdiez@ip-65-125-90-171.ieminc.com] has left #mapbuilder []
20:57 stvn: bye matt
20:57 Cappelaere: cya
20:57 Cappelaere: that the way i read to document
20:57 Cappelaere: it seems pretty clear to me
20:57 Cappelaere: but I have one eye left
20:58 camerons: Steven, interesting.
20:58 stvn: (sorry for the horrible format of that paste)
20:59 camerons: What about if there was a "sub-foundation" or division of the foundation for each project which is controlled by our PMC?
20:59 Cappelaere: I am not sure how they will deal with MapServer owned by UMN though
21:01 stvn: we didn't tackle the first point cameron said yet
21:01 camerons: I'll need to read the PDF afterwards. But who should own our code?
21:01 camerons: What do WE want?
21:02 stvn: I talked to the geofoundation ppl earlier and they said that most likely the new PSC will be the same as the current PMC if it's there and the chairman of the current PMC will be asked to become member of the foundation
21:03 camerons: In the current situation, we will not legally be able to change license and the like in a few years time because we won't be able to contact all developers.
21:03 stvn: camerons: basically nobody should own it as in closed source
21:04 stvn: tyler is putting forward some compelling arguments on long term sustainability of the code
21:05 camerons: Steven, do we ever want to change the license of Mapbuilder? If so, it would be good for a benign organisation to own the code.
21:05 Cappelaere: you mean like the foundation?
21:06 camerons: Also, if we want to protect ourselves legally, then the Foundation will only help out if the Foundation owns the code.
21:06 camerons: Pat, yes.
21:06 Cappelaere: if you cannot guarantee that you own the code now, how can you trnsfer it to the foundation?
21:07 stvn: Cappelaere: the foundation is supposed to work similar as the apache foundation and as such just a big OSS project, with the sole interest helping it's projects in the long term through legaldifficulties
21:07 Cappelaere: looks like we have a legal problem already
21:07 Cappelaere: do you really have 100+ contributors to the base?
21:08 stvn: Cappelaere: leaving it here wouldn't solve that problem
21:08 Cappelaere: agree
21:08 stvn: giving the code to the foundation would at least assign the problem to them <evil grin>
21:08 camerons: By the way Pat, I think the commercial benefits of joining the Foundation outweigh the commercial benefits of Mapbuilder.com owning our code and offering dual licensing.
21:08 camerons: .
21:09 Cappelaere: but they willnot take it either
21:09 Cappelaere: they will do diligence on intellectual property on all code being submitted
21:09 camerons: Do people want time to read the doc first and regroup in 15 mins?
21:11 stvn: I've read it, but fine by me
21:11 stvn: mean time I'll keep discussing in geofoundation
21:12 Cappelaere: where do you have those discusssions?
21:12 camerons: recovering from glitch - I was off for a couple of mins.
21:12 stvn: #geofoundation
21:13 stvn: same server
21:13 Cappelaere: hummmm
21:13 camerons: Pat, the number of developers is still small enough for us to contact everyone.
21:13 camerons: (everyone who has contributed).
21:13 Cappelaere: you might want to do this at some point...
21:14 camerons: So it is still an option to give our code to the Foundation.
21:14 Cappelaere: k
21:14 camerons: But probably won't be an option in a couple of years.
21:15 camerons: Of note, we recently changed license from GPL to LGPL and need to contact all developers before doing so.
21:15 stvn: Cappelaere: there's a footnote on the mapserver code ownership btw
21:16 Cappelaere: I have read it
21:16 Cappelaere: they go both ways on the issue
21:17 camerons: Pat, can you join #geofoundation please
21:17 Cappelaere: I think the footnote is about the name MapServer rather than the code
#geofoundation logs
11:16:45 camerons: popping over from our Mapbuilder meeting where we are discussing joining issues.
11:16:58 TylerM: I was just saying to stvn...
11:17:08 TylerM: "Ultimately, you need to see that the governance is fair and equitable and board is acceptable, then you can see how your project could/could not benefit."
11:17:29 TylerM: This first meeting with a wide group of stakeholders will help ensure that it does end up being beneficial to others to join.
11:18:28 Cappelaere: heya
11:18:36 camerons: Ok, we now have 3 or of the Mpabuilder 4 Project Management Committee members in this room.
11:19:02 stvn: we are so burrying TylerM with requests now
11:19:03 camerons: 3 out of 4 MB members
11:19:03 TylerM: Now I'm feeling overpowered
11:19:12 camerons:
11:19:27 TylerM: Heh - not that I have any competing project though
11:19:33 camerons: I think we agree we'd like to join.
11:19:43 TylerM: stvn is from mb too?
11:19:54 stvn: yep
11:20:05 : * stvn thought I said so earlier
11:20:05 TylerM: He's been harassing me for hours already!
11:20:06 TylerM:
11:20:10 camerons: Tyler, where do you stand in the geospacial organisation?
11:20:18 stvn: just preparing for the mb meeting
11:20:27 TylerM: ah..as a supporter only..
11:20:33 TylerM: not representing any project per se.
11:20:41 camerons: ok
11:20:43 TylerM: Just interested in getting everybody together to find synergy etc.
11:21:09 Cappelaere: Tyler, Who are you representing?
11:21:24 camerons: You have probably answered this already, but who should own our MB code?
11:21:38 TylerM: Cappelaere: Just myself.
11:22:09 TylerM: If you care to know, I work for http://timberline.ca and I'm a Mapserver, GDAL, Openev, QGIS, PostGIS, Geoserver, ka-map, etc. user...
11:22:10 sigq: Title: Timberline Forest Inventory Consultants (at timberline.ca)
11:22:21 Cappelaere: thanks
11:22:23 TylerM: but don't really represent any of them per se.
11:22:33 TylerM: This is done on my own time.
11:22:42 stvn: and wrote a nice book on webmapping
11:22:56 Cappelaere: got to read it then
11:23:10 stvn: which lacks mapbuilder IIRC
11:23:11 TylerM: Oh yeah, I always forget that I'm an O'Reilly author
11:23:23 TylerM: Mapbuilder...never heard of it. Just joking
11:23:25 Cappelaere: even cooler
11:23:35 TylerM: Cappelaere: http://oreilly.com/catalog/webmapping
11:23:37 sigq: Title: oreilly.com – Online Catalog: Web Mapping Illustrated, First Edition (at oreilly.com)
11:24:12 TylerM: camerons: re: code ownership...perhaps stvn can re-articulate our discussion?
11:24:28 stvn: moment
11:25:08 camerons: Steven was suggesting the Foundation should own the code. Will that be a requirement or a preference?
11:26:19 camerons: Earlier comments on email lists suggested that it would be almost impossible to get permission from all authors to join the foundation.
11:26:31 camerons: (for other projects)
11:28:37 stvn: basically he said: he thinks it is required that gsf acquires code; to provide legal shield; its mandate is to ensure long term public access of the code and finally that code ownership is 'odd' in the OSS world anyway, this way it's less fuzzy
11:29:34 TylerM: camerons: yeah, so, what would be the difference - how is code ownership defined in an OSS context?
11:30:39 stvn: TylerM: is the license going to change once handed over?
11:30:39 TylerM: who 'owns' the code now?
11:30:43 stvn: me me me
11:30:49 stvn:
11:30:49 camerons:
11:30:59 : * TylerM stands back to watch the fist-fight!
11:31:09 camerons: Currently we state that the PMC owns the code.
11:31:16 camerons: However that has no legal standing.
11:31:41 camerons: So legally I'd say that the developers own the code they have contributed.
11:31:54 TylerM: Please keep in mind that we're just brainstorming and more brainstorming will occur at the meeting, so don't think an issue is clear jsut because I said it
11:32:04 camerons: But I'm not a lawyer. So I'm not sure where we stand.
11:32:07 TylerM: I think ownership comes to copyright does it not?
11:32:20 camerons: yes
11:33:05 camerons: Mapbuilder is still small enough that we could potentially contact all developers and convince them to hand code over to Foundation.
11:33:48 TylerM: Hypothetically (I hope) if someone took the code and claimed copyright, who would protest?
11:33:55 TylerM: And what case could be made?
11:34:48 : * TylerM is no lawyer either and I'm sure my comments are going to hurt my entrance exam score to law school...
11:34:49 camerons: Hypothetically I might protest.
11:35:23 TylerM: I hope so!
11:35:24 TylerM:
11:35:52 camerons: But I probably won't fund myself to fight it.
11:36:15 camerons: My case would be that someone is breaking copywrite.
11:36:26 : * stvn wonders what the license is going to be
11:37:06 camerons: I assume any OSI license is fine, which means we would continue using the LGPL.
11:37:22 TylerM: license stuff is going to be a debate, but I think frankw echoes most peoples' sentiment...
11:37:50 TylerM: any OSI license, but maybe the foundation would have a 'recommended' one in case there was a need.
11:38:08 camerons: Yes, I'm happy with that.
11:38:09 TylerM: NOTE: logs from this channel are available: http://logs.qgis.org/geofoundation
11:38:10 sigq: Title: Index of /geofoundation (at logs.qgis.org)
11:38:18 stvn: I guess quite some people would become upset when code goes from lgpl to gpl or vice versa
11:38:31 TylerM: The idea isn't to change any project, but to help formalise certain capacities and support it to grow and prosper.
11:38:37 stvn: k
11:38:56 stvn: last item on the list is code maturity I believe
11:40:10 stvn: do we need to have a certain level of code maturity?
11:41:46 TylerM: As long as the code can grow a beard, I suspect it is mature enough.
11:41:52 TylerM:
11:42:03 stvn: the famous MapBeard extension
11:42:23 camerons: We are an AJAX client, and consequently testing is a lot more expensive because tools are not as well developed and we have lots of different platforms to support.
11:42:31 TylerM: I don't think the foundation should be interested in propping up any projects that can't currently support themselves.
11:43:01 TylerM: That's one measure of maturity.
11:43:19 camerons: Understood and I agree.
11:43:20 TylerM: If users are using the product, that is important
11:44:00 stvn: I've got my company hooked on it, so I guess we can say so
11:44:14 Cappelaere: same here
11:44:55 TylerM: I assume we won't want vapor-ware, alpha-ware, beta-ware or tupper-ware either.
11:45:10 TylerM:
11:45:34 TylerM: I'm sure there are lots of 'still at first beta release' projects on sf.net
11:45:41 TylerM: that are clearly going nowhere.
11:45:49 : * stvn wouldn't mind to be a tupper-ware application, I need some storage containers anyway
11:45:49 camerons: I feel we are on the verge of moving out of beta-ware. But like Google, we will still be in Beta for a while.
11:46:10 Cappelaere: that's definition of web 2.0 projects
11:46:15 Cappelaere: beta for life
11:46:17 : * TylerM is speaking candidly and completely ignorant of mapbuilder's current status
11:46:24 stvn: heh
11:46:25 TylerM: You know what I mean
11:46:48 camerons: Beta means different things to different people too.
11:47:11 TylerM: A purpose statement like this for the foundation would sum it up: "To support and encourage the development of high-quality open source applications for geospatial data management and visualisation"...
11:47:32 TylerM: Note, that's not a quote, I just wrote it.
11:47:37 camerons: Yes.
11:47:58 stvn: TylerM: http://jana.geodan.nl:90/edugis/mambo4523/mapbuilder/edugis/ <- that's an old beta of a site I'm developing
11:48:10 camerons: The key is the definition of "quality"
11:48:10 TylerM: that's a mouthful url
11:48:17 TylerM: right
11:48:21 stvn: (the release version of it is behind closed doors for the time being
11:49:09 camerons: I agree that we should promote quality, and it is something we are working on, but at the same time I'd like to make sure we don't get excluded based on a quality critieria.
11:50:12 stvn: let's put it this way I did a research on OGC webclients and mapbuilder is probably one of the best and surely the best in certain areas
11:50:28 camerons: And I think that we will be good for the Foundation, because, among other things, we are the only current AJAX WFS-T client.
11:50:44 stvn: chameleon is a much more mature webclient, but so slow and difficult
11:51:23 Cappelaere: Is the distance tool in 1.0?
11:51:42 stvn: Cappelaere: nope, I finished it after the feature freeze
11:51:49 stvn: will commit it soon(ish)
11:52:09 TylerM: A foundation should be interested in projects that make it look good and useful - that's another way to consider quality I guess.
11:52:19 stvn:
11:52:38 Cappelaere: Tyler: is meeting really limited to 25?
11:52:53 TylerM: An interesting scenario, in my mind, is when three different but similar projects want to join....
11:52:59 TylerM: Cappelaere: yes
11:53:08 TylerM: Remember, this is only the startup meeting!
11:53:09 stvn: we would be compitition with ka-map
11:53:19 Cappelaere: seems like you already hav ethe problem
11:53:35 Cappelaere: Apache has that too
11:53:52 stvn: i guess geoserver and mapserver can be considered similar as well
11:54:00 TylerM: If MapServer and MapGuide both make it into the foundation - we have the problem from the very beginning
11:54:04 TylerM: some overlap for sure.
11:54:12 TylerM: Cappelaere: does apache? how?
11:54:18 TylerM: stvn: yes, and geoserver too
11:54:26 Cappelaere: Apache has projects that appear to compete
11:54:34 Cappelaere: epsecially on the XML side
11:54:56 Cappelaere: new WS-* stuff
11:55:30 Cappelaere: I do not think it is a bad problem to have
11:55:53 Cappelaere: competitition has always been a good thing
11:56:09 TylerM: stvn: nice demo, thanks.
11:56:11 TylerM: very clean
11:56:52 TylerM: I agree competition is good - I do think we'll want to have a strong commitment from projects to try to find ways to collaborate though.
11:56:55 stvn: TylerM: be aware it's an old beta and has some very rough edges
11:57:16 TylerM: To produce even better best-of-breed software that couldn't have happened without the foundation 'umbrella' encouraging them.
11:57:34 TylerM: stvn: I can tell, all the text is messed up - it's unreadable.
11:57:43 Cappelaere: I noticed that too
11:57:48 TylerM:
11:58:08 TylerM: Seem to be english letters but the words are unintelligible
11:58:11 stvn: TylerM: and in some weird language as well
11:58:15 stvn: lol
11:58:18 TylerM: oh, that's it
11:58:40 stvn: TylerM: wait untill you hear it being spoken, you believe they are sick
11:59:09 TylerM: you are using chameleon buttons...is MB fit into chameleon somehow here?
11:59:42 stvn: nope
12:00:05 TylerM: stvn: you at geodan?
12:00:08 stvn: the old project used chameleon and I used these buttons (with proper attribution I believe)
12:00:12 stvn: TylerM: yep
12:00:31 TylerM: who else did I know over there?
12:00:35 TylerM: hmm..
12:00:36 stvn: robert?
12:00:43 TylerM: nope
12:01:01 TylerM: chiel?
12:01:02 stvn: there are 84 ppl there now, I could name them all ...
12:01:11 TylerM: I get confused in europe
12:01:14 stvn: heh
12:01:34 stvn: I believe there was a chiel at geodan, but not anymore
12:02:18 TylerM: bart!?
12:02:39 TylerM: van den eijnden
12:02:52 TylerM: yeah.
12:03:15 stvn: yep he was geodan
12:03:35 stvn: left about the same time when I joined geodan
12:03:46 TylerM: ah.
12:04:06 TylerM: So, back to the foundation discussion...
12:04:36 TylerM: one question that comes up regularly is 'how can a foundation support multiple projects that have similar functionality and still support them equitably"?
12:05:16 TylerM: Quite often the question revolves around "If the foundation gets funding to support development, how will it distribute funds to projects equitably?"
12:05:49 Cappelaere: because it does not
12:05:53 TylerM: But if you put the funding issue aside, there is less potential conflict/problem.
12:06:18 Cappelaere: Is the foundation goal to fund development?
12:06:31 TylerM: That's a question for debate.
12:06:42 Cappelaere: Apache does not that I know of
12:06:42 TylerM: I put a few ideas down here: http://mapserver.gis.umn.edu/community/foundation/background/foundationtasks/
12:06:44 sigq: Title: Potential Tasks and Responsibilities UMN MapServer (at mapserver.gis.umn.edu)
12:06:48 TylerM: Right - apache does not.
12:07:56 TylerM: My ideas were just a brainstorm, bu some of them mention funding...
12:08:34 TylerM: I've received several comments, mostly about the funding ideas and how it can be very difficult to make it work.
12:08:40 TylerM: equitably anyway.
12:09:35 TylerM: Mainly around - who would the foundation hire to do development work with the funds - how would they determine the person/company to do the work, etc.
12:10:08 TylerM: In my mind, the most pressing issues the foundation addresses won't be around funding. Like I said before, I believe projects should be self-supporting.
12:10:09 gsherman: the foundation should pass $$ to the project and let them figure it out
12:10:15 Cappelaere: how much money do you think you woul dhave to play with anyway?
12:10:25 TylerM: gsherman: If there's cash around, I agree.
12:10:35 TylerM: Cappelaere: expect none
12:10:40 Cappelaere: I agree
12:10:48 Cappelaere: so it is a moot point
12:11:03 TylerM: My opinion anyway, some would disagree, and may see the foundation as a way to help funnel funds into development.
12:11:12 gsherman: not if the foundation is used to launder money from contributors to a specific project
12:11:25 Cappelaere: you can always spent your money on a DC lobbyist
12:11:25 gsherman: (not moot)
12:12:00 Cappelaere: how do you see that happen?
12:12:00 TylerM: While I believe the foundation must balance its support of both users and developers - I do not see the primary benefits being around funding management. I think few people do.
12:12:17 gsherman: many projects don't have a means to accept donations and use it for development
12:12:36 gsherman: sure you can take the money, but if there is no "entity", someone will incur a tax liabitliy
12:12:45 Cappelaere: In that case, this would be targeted funding
12:13:02 TylerM: I could see how the foundation can easily help provide a donation 'front' to a project, but without touching the money itself.
12:13:14 gsherman: thats one of the things i think it should do
12:13:29 gsherman: i don't see it (foundation) as a funding vehicle
12:13:40 gsherman: projects should scare up their own funding
12:13:44 TylerM: Interesting though, I saw FrankW and adoyle has discussed related issues earlier today.
12:13:56 TylerM: re: charitable status.
12:14:06 gsherman: not that the foundation couldn't be involved in some way
12:14:32 TylerM: I'm interested to hear which items you guys all think are top on your list for foundation tasks.
12:14:40 TylerM: i.e. pick the top 3 from my list. http://mapserver.gis.umn.edu/community/foundation/background/foundationtasks/
12:14:42 sigq: Title: Potential Tasks and Responsibilities UMN MapServer (at mapserver.gis.umn.edu)
12:16:08 Cappelaere: We need an open source version of OGC
12:16:46 Cappelaere: problem is that the standards would belong to the foundation ... hummmm
12:16:53 TylerM: That's another idea (not in my list though) - the foundation could help projects through OGC compliance testing.
12:16:59 Cappelaere: woul dnot be that bad after all
12:17:24 Cappelaere: too meek
12:17:36 TylerM: OT Note: MapGuide Open Source is the new name for Tux/MapServer Enterprise.
12:17:41 Cappelaere: we need to drive the standards and not just follow them
12:18:08 Cappelaere: OGC is not a good place for us to do this
12:19:03 Cappelaere: I think that Managing the brand is critical (as well as developer infrastructure but $$$)
12:19:19 Cappelaere: codehaus is fine although slow at times
12:19:24 TylerM: What do you mean "but $$$"
12:19:31 Cappelaere: expensive
12:19:48 Cappelaere: would be nice to have a server farm to show off live demos
12:20:08 TylerM: Everyone I've talked to agrees that developer infrastructure is critical part of the foundation support to projects.
12:20:11 TylerM: I think you can bet on it.
12:20:20 TylerM: maybe not a server farm though
12:20:28 Cappelaere:
12:21:05 Cappelaere: I think you have done a great job on that page
12:21:37 : * stvn is against a developer infrastructure, I'm spending all my free time in structuring/decorating the codehaus site
12:21:49 Cappelaere: [besides funding product development :\)]
12:21:51 stvn: don't want to do that again
12:21:56 Cappelaere: lol
12:22:30 stvn: but on a more serious note, a decent webmapping demo site would be great
12:23:01 Cappelaere: and support on-going joint demonstrations across projects
12:23:16 Cappelaere: again to drive the standards
12:26:12 Cappelaere: what's the position of OGC with the foundation?
12:29:54 Cappelaere: still there?
12:33:14 TylerM: on phone
12:33:19 Cappelaere: k
12:39:10 stvn: hey tim
12:48:36 TylerM: Cappelaere: OGC has no relationship to the foundation - this is more about open source tools than standards.
12:49:01 TylerM: stvn: having a place for high-quality demonstrations of foundation projects is a good idea that is really needed for some projects.
12:50:04 stvn: the trouble is that webmapping clients are dependable on servers and vice versa and they both are dependable on good/fast/free data
12:51:00 TylerM: Freeing up geodata is also a topic several people want to talk about. I see it as secondary to the main goal to support open source tools.
12:51:37 : * TylerM prepares for non-Americans to start ranting about geodata access issues
12:55:21 TylerM: stvn: On a similar note, the idea of 'certification' has come up several times as a job for the foundation...
12:55:42 TylerM: that is, testing projects/products and giving them a stamp of approval for meeting certain standards/specifciations.
12:55:50 : * stvn rants a bit on the lack of free geodata in .eu for TylerM's sake
12:55:51 TylerM: i.e. for interoperability between each other
12:56:00 TylerM: stvn: there's a problem?
12:56:07 stvn: TylerM: that would be interesing indeed
12:56:32 stvn: TylerM: actually for me there isn't when I was at the uni I had acces and now I'm at geodan I still have access
12:56:55 stvn: but for the ordinary ppl and pet projects it's a pain in the behind
12:57:14 Cappelaere: This would be a great thing to do
12:57:24 TylerM: Cappelaere: which idea?
12:57:33 Cappelaere: free access to data
12:57:55 Cappelaere: we do not have enough of it
12:58:10 Cappelaere: like digitized map of the world
12:58:13 TylerM: I agree, but I'm wondering if its worthy of a different group to be doing.
12:58:20 TylerM: adoyle: isn't that part of eogeo's mandate already?
12:58:35 TylerM: I mean, so this foundation can focus on tools.
12:58:37 adoyle: sort of
12:58:57 Cappelaere: tools with no data does not help that much
12:59:06 Cappelaere: they go hand in hand
12:59:15 TylerM: Heh - that Mapbuilder ain't worth much then
12:59:26 adoyle: I think access to free data could be a big resource sink if actually pursued properly.
12:59:28 Cappelaere: we are working on that
12:59:36 stvn: TylerM: it is for me, I have data
13:00:09 adoyle: I think the foundation could articulate some principles that it would like to foster but doesn't have the resources to pursue.
13:00:15 TylerM: Cappelaere: I'm just joking, but you get the point. Products are successful because some (a lot ?!) people have data. Or else they wouldn't be looking for a tool in the first place.
13:00:36 Cappelaere: true
13:00:38 TylerM: adoyle: good point.
13:00:41 adoyle: I also think the initial foundation task is to get a handle on the legal protection thing
13:00:47 TylerM: yes
13:00:54 TylerM: I agree.
13:01:19 Cappelaere: I would hate to see yet another open gis foundaton just for data
13:01:24 adoyle: I think Autodesk wants its funding to go towards building a nice, warm, safe nest for MGOS (MapGuide Open Source)
13:01:26 TylerM: Cappelaere: there could definitely be a role to play for the foundation to encourage tools that allow people to create their own geodata too.
13:01:35 adoyle: There are already other open data efforts.
13:01:44 TylerM: That's why I'm thinking of.
13:01:48 TylerM: what
13:01:49 Cappelaere: they need a home too
13:02:27 adoyle: I think a big push to set up interlinked open geodata repositories would be good, but I don't see that as the foundation's role
13:02:51 Cappelaere: do you know a lot of those?
13:03:08 adoyle: Well, there are pockets of free data all over the place
13:03:29 TylerM: Cappelaere: there are still in pockets
13:03:50 adoyle: http://katrina.telascience.org/
13:03:52 sigq: Title: Katrina Katrina Image Warehouse (at katrina.telascience.org)
13:03:56 adoyle: for instance...
13:03:58 adoyle: lol
13:04:02 Cappelaere: that just happened
13:04:12 Cappelaere: by accident
13:04:20 adoyle: sort of.
13:04:41 adoyle: But now that it's there, the trick is to get it to stay there
13:04:45 TylerM: lots of wms sources, but at global scale and many want vector data
13:04:49 Cappelaere: agree
13:04:52 adoyle: yes.
13:05:05 Cappelaere: that's where the foundation can help
21:20 Cappelaere: who are you representing then?
21:40 stvn: btw ppl there's an export function in confluence, but I don't seem to get it working
22:11 camerons: I've got to go.
22:12 stvn: k bye cameron
22:12 stvn: thanks