Project Steering Committee - Home

Meeting Info

This meeting of the MapGuide PSC takes place Thursday, May 6, 2010 at 18:00 UTC (2:00 PM ET / noon MT / 11:00 AM PT).

Meeting Chair: Bob Bray

Universal Time: ​http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?month=05&day=06&year=2010&hour=12&min=0&sec=0&p1=55

Location: The meeting will be held on IRC at ​#mapguide

Agenda

• Appoint a Meeting Secretary
• MapGuide 2.2 Beta Release (Trevor)
• Move Maestro up a level in the subversion repository? (Tom)

Minutes

PSC Members present: Andy, Bob, Tom, Trevor

MapGuide 2.2 Beta Release

• Meta tiling rfc (​RFC 90) code is not ready and will be marked "on hold" and will not be in 2.2.
• Target May 14th for beta.
• Documentation will be light.

Move Maestro up a level in the subversion repository?

• With the direction of Maestro, we should consider moving it up to the root of the MG vault.
• Not enough members to make a decision. Will continue discussion on email.

Full transcript

	<rbray>	ok first up is the MapGuide 2.2 Beta Release (Trevor)
	<trevorw>	Yep. Just wanted to chat about RFC status.
	<trevorw>	The meta tiling RFC seems to be on hold. According to Zac, UV is moving right now.
	<trevorw>	Should we wait for it? Ask the list? other?
	<rbray>	I would defer it personally, what do others think?
	<trevorw>	I am ok with defer. I can send an email to -internals suggesting it.
	<tom_>	I think we should defer it.
	<trevorw>	Ok. That's all I had for the beta. I can do the builds at any time.
	<rbray>	Ok then let's do it.
	<rbray>	Can someone change the status of the RFC to "On Hold"?
	<trevorw>	Sure. I will put it on hold. End of next week for the beta? The documentation might be a bit light (pretty busy right now).
	<rbray>	That's ok, as long as we can post the build and provide basic instructions - that's fine.
	<trevorw>	Ok. Sounds good. Thanks.
	<rbray>	The only other item belongs to Tom - Move Maestro up a level in the subversion repository? (Tom)
	<tom_>	There was a discussion about moving the Maestro code up in the directory structure so that it could have it's own branching structure. I was originally against this, but after being told the direction of Maestro from Jason I have changed my mind.
	<tom_>	Jason wrote: "Although Maestro is linked to MapGuide, it is not a 1:1 relationship (unlike Studio), and has potential to be even less linked over time. Jackie has plans of pulling full FDO Toolbox capabilities into Maestro, I wouldn't be surprised to see support for GeoREST configuration / templating at some point, and who knows... maybe someone will make it create MapServer config files at...
	<tom_>	...some point :) IMO, locking it into the MapGuide release cycle constrains its potential."
	<tom_>	It is currently at /Trunk/Tools/Maestro, but I think that we would like to move it to /Maestro. This would mean the root of our vault would be /trunk, /branches, /sandbox, /tags, /Maestro. And then /Maestro would have subdirectories trunk, branches.
	<tom_>	(I type fast eh :))
	<rbray>	you cut and paste well Tom
	<rbray>	Yea that is ok with me too - anyone object?
	<rbray>	The other option is to make it, it's own project.
	<rbray>	But that requires a lot more work.
	<trevorw>	I'm good with moving it Mr. cut and paste. Should we put it under Tools/Maestro or just /Maestro
	<tom_>	Unfortunately, I think that Jason is the one who objects, and he's not here
	<rbray>	I would go just /Maestro
	<rbray>	What's his objection?
	<tom_>	From an email: > >>> I think we discussed this when we were initially bringing Maestro in.
	<tom_>	> >>>
	<tom_>	> >>> It was a while back, but I think the intention was to just use a
	<tom_>	> >>> prefix for the Maestro branches (/branches/Maestro-2.1, etc...)
	<tom_>	> >>> similar to how its done in tags.
	<trevorw>	I like having it as it's own top level folder personally. I think Apache follows similar semantics.
	<rbray>	ok - let's leave this on e-mail to resolve. I am ok with that approach too, we just need to collectively decide.
	<trevorw>	Ok. Works for me too.
	<tom_>	OK
	<rbray>	THat was it for the agenda - any other business?
	<trevorw>	(tom's really happy - short PSC meeting...)
	<rbray>	Me too, I am swamped.
	<tom_>	No, but I just saw a posting on mapguide-users that someone is happy with the HTTP API doc
	<tom_>	nice work Trevor!
	<rbray>	Nice work Trevor!
	<rbray>	dang - and I could have cut and paste if I waited one more second.
	<rbray>	Ok guys, then we are adjourned.
	<rbray>	Thanks!
	<tom_>	Thanks
	<trevorw>	You're welcome and thanks everyone!