<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
I can say that the way Maestro is placed under the same trac instance
makes some problems.<br>
I imagine it is annoying to get commit messages from Maestro, if you
are working on MapGuide.<br>
I can also see that I get confused when I get a trac ticket that does
not explicitly say "Maestro".<br>
There seems to a number of tickets that initally gets assigned to
something other than Maestro.<br>
The version numbering does not work well, since Maestro and MapGuide
uses different version numberings.<br>
<br>
Like Zac notes, it is also difficult to find stuff that is specific to
either project.<br>
<br>
Are there stuff that the Fusion team belives would work better if they
shared the trac with MapGuide?<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">Regards, Kenneth Skovhede, GEOGRAF A/S
</pre>
<br>
<br>
Zac Spitzer skrev:
<blockquote
cite="mid:7a85053e0811061733g4dcda2d1q66726242bc6fcd51@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">As a general question here, would it make more sense to
create a separate trac instance <br>
for FDO toolbox?<br>
<br>
I am thinking specifically about how this has gone with the mapguide
project, fusion for example <br>
was moved to a seperate instance, whilst maestro still lives under
mapguide.<br>
<br>
It makes it's harder to track core mapguide stuff via timelines and the
like due to the volume<br>
or maestro specific stuff..<br>
<br>
Thoughts?<br>
<br>
z<br>
<br>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Nov 6, 2008 at 3:48 PM, Jason Birch <span
dir="ltr"><<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:Jason.Birch@nanaimo.ca">Jason.Birch@nanaimo.ca</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote"
style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">RFC
27 for bringing FDO Toolbox into the FDO fold has passed, with support
from Greg, Haris, Frank, Orest, and Jason, which is as good as
unanimous these days :)<br>
<br>
As soon as the code can be migrated to our SVN and binaries posted on <a
moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://download.osgeo.org" target="_blank">download.osgeo.org</a>,
I would like to see an announcement go out via the OSGeo news queue.<br>
<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/News_Queue" target="_blank">http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/News_Queue</a><br>
<br>
I can draft this if there are no other volunteers.<br>
<br>
Jason<br>
<br>
________________________________<br>
<br>
From: Jason Birch<br>
Subject: RE: [fdo-internals] RFC 27 for review<br>
<br>
Given that we've heard from most of the PSC and there has been no<br>
negative feedback, I would like to move to accept RFC 27:<br>
<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://trac.osgeo.org/fdo/wiki/FDORfc27" target="_blank">http://trac.osgeo.org/fdo/wiki/FDORfc27</a><br>
<br>
+1 Jason<br>
<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
fdo-internals mailing list<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:fdo-internals@lists.osgeo.org">fdo-internals@lists.osgeo.org</a><br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/fdo-internals"
target="_blank">http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/fdo-internals</a><br>
<br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
<br clear="all">
<br>
-- <br>
Zac Spitzer -<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://zacster.blogspot.com">http://zacster.blogspot.com</a>
(My Blog)<br>
+61 405 847 168<br>
<pre wrap="">
<hr size="4" width="90%">
_______________________________________________
fdo-internals mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:fdo-internals@lists.osgeo.org">fdo-internals@lists.osgeo.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/fdo-internals">http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/fdo-internals</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>