[geomoose-psc] 3.1.0 Roadmap - Please comment!

[Basques, Bob (CI-StPaul)]

All,

One item for the agenda, Voting on RFC 6:.  And along with that, select the fiscal agent (officially) or is the Website just out of date on this and it has been ratified already?  Either way, there is a small amount of money already put into an account intended for GeoMoose  but we need to get this fiscal agent stuff ratified and recorded first..

I have plans to request some funding from OSGeo (as I did last year) for funding to promote GeoMoose and OSGeo.  Things went really slow with the request last year and one thing led to another where we didn’t receive anything from the OSGeo pot,   There may still be avenues there, either way, there seems to be a process in place now to distribute based on requests.   I’m going to propose a $3k sum for Sprint(s), and Conference attendance aspects this year as well.  This is the same amount I asked for last (this year).

The ratification of the requested funding from last year becoming available, might lead to us recieving the funds, but at this point I wouldn’t rely on it.  regardless, we’ll need the fiscal stuff in place first and foremost.

bobb


On Sep 28, 2017, at 3:35 PM, Dan Little <theduckylittle at gmail.com<mailto:theduckylittle at gmail.com>> wrote:

I'll try to throw together a doodle soon for the fall PSC meeting.

On Thu, Sep 28, 2017 at 3:34 PM, Eli Adam <eadam at co.lincoln.or.us<mailto:eadam at co.lincoln.or.us>> wrote:
Pertaining to the general editing environment, this might be
interesting.  http://geops.de/blog/104-cad-feature-construction-openlayers-editor?language=en

Sorry for delay and maybe this was discussed in Boston.  I added the
above and also something about minor interface fine tuning to the
wiki.  This along with some other things (website, demo, GH
configurations,etc) might be worth a meeting sometime.

Cheers, Eli

On Sat, Aug 19, 2017 at 5:03 PM, James Klassen <klassen.js at gmail.com<mailto:klassen.js at gmail.com>> wrote:
> WFS-T: Part of that could be really cool is if we took T part* of the
> protocol seriously instead of just using it as a complicated way to send a
> feature back to a server.  (PUT /dataset/id <geojson> would be a much
> simpler way to imolement what we had used WFS-T for in 2.x...  WFS-T has so
> much more potential than that.)
>
> * Web Feature Service - Transactional.
>
> On Aug 19, 2017 11:18, "Dan Little" <theduckylittle at gmail.com<mailto:theduckylittle at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> Hey Folks,
>
> I know we're not far from FOSS4G and really not far from the release but I
> wanted to get a brief roadmap put together of "next up" features:
>
> - https://github.com/geomoose/gm3/wiki/Roadmap
>
> Adding back editing and better feature manipulation is REALLY ambitious.  We
> spent years in the last version to try and do it.
>
> Cheers,
>
> -Duck
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> geomoose-psc mailing list
> geomoose-psc at lists.osgeo.org<mailto:geomoose-psc at lists.osgeo.org>
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geomoose-psc
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> geomoose-psc mailing list
> geomoose-psc at lists.osgeo.org<mailto:geomoose-psc at lists.osgeo.org>
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geomoose-psc

_______________________________________________
geomoose-psc mailing list
geomoose-psc at lists.osgeo.org<mailto:geomoose-psc at lists.osgeo.org>
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geomoose-psc



"We didn't lose the game; we just ran out of time."
- Vince Lombardi




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/geomoose-psc/attachments/20170928/3f8c4d3d/attachment-0001.html>