[SCM] postgis.net branch website updated. clarity-final-71-gf558d7d

[git at osgeo.org]

This is an automated email from the git hooks/post-receive script. It was
generated because a ref change was pushed to the repository containing
the project "postgis.net".

The branch, website has been updated
       via  f558d7dcd29bef54ee5a61b7d185e35594849c86 (commit)
      from  a332531e4fa08277ff10ac7de4988c6f7ea2bdf1 (commit)

Those revisions listed above that are new to this repository have
not appeared on any other notification email; so we list those
revisions in full, below.

- Log -----------------------------------------------------------------
commit f558d7dcd29bef54ee5a61b7d185e35594849c86
Author: Regina Obe <lr at pcorp.us>
Date:   Fri Nov 17 00:10:29 2023 -0500

    Put back RFCs which were removed during the hugo 2 conversion

diff --git a/content/development/rfcs/_index.md b/content/development/rfcs/_index.md
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..dea0c85
--- /dev/null
+++ b/content/development/rfcs/_index.md
@@ -0,0 +1,8 @@
+---
+title: RFCs
+date: 2023-11-16
+weight: 140
+geekdocHidden: false
+---
+
+{{< toc-tree >}}
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/content/development/rfcs/rfc01.md b/content/development/rfcs/rfc01.md
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..831bead
--- /dev/null
+++ b/content/development/rfcs/rfc01.md
@@ -0,0 +1,150 @@
+---
+title: "RFC-1: Project Steering Committee"
+author: Chris Hodgson
+category: rfcs
+date: 2019-10-31
+lastmod: 2022-03-01
+draft: false
+status: Draft
+type: rfc
+relatedInSidebar: false
+singlecolumn: true
+sidebar: false
+geekdocHidden: true
+geekdocHiddenTocTree: false
+---
+
+This document describes the functions of the PostGIS Project Steering Committee determines membership, and process used to carry out those functions.
+
+# Functions of the Project Steering Committee
+
+The two primary functions of the PSC are:
+
+ 1. To enforce control over the PostGIS codebase. This can be summarized as:
+    a. Enforce mechanisms to ensure quality control
+    b. Ensure compliance with all required legal measures
+ 2. Project Management and responsibility for the "public face" of PostGIS
+
+The PSC is expected to be able to speak and act on behalf of the PostGIS project.
+
+# Codebase Control
+
+## Quality Control Mechanisms
+
+The quality control mechanisms, which are the responsibility of the PSC, currently include:
+
+ * Maintaining submitter guidelines and making all developers aware of them.
+ * Granting write access to the source code repository for new developers.
+ * Enforcing the submitter guidelines, with the ultimate sanction against non-compliance being removal of write access to the source code repository.
+
+In general, once write access has been granted, developers are allowed to make changes to the codebase as they see fit. For controversial or complicated changes consensus must be obtained on the developers' mailing list, or an RFC and vote may be required.
+
+Removal of write access to the source code repository is handled as a proposal to the committee as described below in the 'Decision Process' section.
+
+## Compliance with Legal Measures
+
+Control over the codebase also extends to ensuring that it complies with all relevant legal requirements. This includes copyright and licensing amongst other issues. The Submitter guidelines document will include a section on copyright and licensing compliance.
+
+# Project Management
+
+The PSC will share responsibility and make decisions over issues related to the management of the overall direction of the PostGIS project and its external visibility. These include, but are not limited to:
+
+ * Release Cycles
+ * Project Infrastructure
+ * Website Maintenance
+ * Promotion and Public Relations
+ * Interaction with other Organizations such as OSGeo
+
+It is the responsibility of the PSC to ensure that issues critical to the future of the PostGIS project are adequately attended to. This may the formation and oversight of sub-committees for particular purposes.
+
+
+# Decision Process
+
+Written proposals are submitted to the the postgis-dev mailing list for discussion and voting. Proposals with significant technical detail should be written on the PostGIS wiki as an RFC, and an e-mail announcing the proposal, with a link to the RFC, should be sent to the postgis-dev mailing list. Proposals can be made by any interested party, not just PSC members.
+
+# Voting
+
+ * Proposals must be available for review for at least two business days before a decision can be made.
+ * Respondents may vote “+1” to indicate support for the proposal and a willingness to support implementation.
+ * Respondents may vote “-1” to veto a proposal, but must provide clear reasoning and alternate approaches to resolving the problem within the two days.
+ * A vote of -0 indicates mild disagreement, but has no effect. A 0 indicates no opinion. A +0 indicate mild support, but has no effect.
+ * Anyone may comment on proposals on the list, but only members of the Project Steering Committee’s votes will be counted.
+ * A proposal will be accepted if it receives +2 (including the author) and no vetoes (-1).
+ * If a proposal is vetoed, and it cannot be revised to satisfy all parties, then it can be resubmitted for an override vote in which a majority of all eligible voters indicating +1 is sufficient to pass it. Note that this is a majority of all committee members, not just those who actively vote. While this vote provides a way to override an obstructionist veto, ideally all members can come to a consensus.
+ * Upon completion of discussion and voting the author should announce whether they are proceeding (proposal accepted) or are withdrawing their proposal (vetoed).
+ * The Chair gets a vote.
+ * The Chair is responsible for keeping track of who is a member of the Project Steering Committee, on a page provided for this purpose on the wiki.
+ * Addition and removal of members from the committee, as well as selection of a Chair should be handled as a proposal to the committee.
+ * The Chair is the ultimate adjudicator in cases of disputes about voting or breakdown of the voting system
+
+## When is a Vote Required?
+
+ * Any change to committee membership (new members, removing inactive members)
+ * Changes to project infrastructure (e.g. tool, location or substantive configuration)
+ * Anything that could cause backward compatibility issues
+ * Adding substantial amounts of new code
+ * Changing inter-subsystem APIs, or objects
+ * Issues of procedure
+ * When releases should take place
+ * Anything dealing with relationships with external entities such as OSGeo
+ * Anything that might be controversial
+
+# Committee Membership
+
+The PSC is made up of individuals consisting of technical contributors (e.g. developers) and prominent members of the PostGIS user community. There is no set number of members for the PSC.
+
+## Adding Members
+
+Any member of the postgis-dev mailing list may nominate someone for committee membership at any time. Only existing PSC committee members may vote on new members. Nominees must receive a majority vote from existing members to be added to the PSC.
+
+Once people are voted into the PSC, the following tasks must be done
+
+* Add them to footer of http://postgis.net site
+* Add them to the git owner list of git.osgeo.org/gitea/postgis, github.com/postgis, gitlab.com/postgis
+* Add them to this document as a current member
+* Add them to the documentation, if they are already in member list, they should be moved up to psc list (current dev and latest stable - https://postgis.net/docs/postgis_introduction.html#psc, https://postgis.net/docs/manual-dev/postgis_introduction.html#psc
+* Add them to linkedin PostGIS project group
+* Add them to psc at postgis.net email distribution (this is in the PairDomains mail forwarding registration - so requires OSGeo sac member to do it)
+* Add them to LDAP postgis group
+* Add them to LDAP shell group and install their sshkey in their account on download.osgeo.org (needed so they can upload source tarballs and docs to download.osgeo.org/postgis) - again requires SAC member at moment to do
+
+## Stepping Down
+
+If for any reason a PSC member is not able to fully participate then they are free to step down. If a member is not active (e.g. no voting, no IRC or email participation) for a period of two months then the committee reserves the right to seek nominations to fill that position. Should that person become active again, they would require a nomination.
+
+
+# Membership Responsibilities
+
+## Guiding Development
+
+Members should take an active role guiding the development of new features they feel passionate about. Once a change request has been accepted and given a green light to proceed does not mean the members are free of their obligation. PSC members voting “+1” for a change request are expected to stay engaged and ensure the change is implemented and documented in a way that is most beneficial to users. Note that this applies not only to change requests that affect code, but also those that affect the web site, technical infrastructure, policies and standards.
+
+## IRC Meeting Attendance
+
+PSC members are expected to participate in pre-scheduled IRC development meetings. If known in advance that a member cannot attend a meeting, the member should let the meeting organizer know via e-mail.
+
+## Mailing List Participation
+
+PSC members are expected to be active on both the postgis-users and postgis-dev mailing lists, subject to open source mailing list etiquette. Non-developer members of the PSC are not expected to respond to coding level questions on the developer mailing list, however they are expected to provide their thoughts and opinions on user level requirements and compatibility issues when RFC discussions take place.
+
+
+# Composition of the PSC
+
+The PostGIS development team has been effectively working under a PSC for several years but the process was not documented. This RFC will be distributed to the postgis-users and postgis-dev mailing lists for comment, and all substantive comments will be addressed appropriately before this RFC is accepted using the voting process defined herein.
+
+The current Project Steering Committee members are:
+
+ * Raúl Marín Rodríguez
+ * Regina Obe
+ * Darafei Praliaskouski
+ * Paul Ramsey (Chair)
+ * Sandro Santilli
+
+The initial Project Steering Committee members were:
+
+ * Mark Cave-Ayland
+ * Chris Hodgson
+ * Kevin Neufeld
+ * Regina Obe
+ * Paul Ramsey (Chair)
+ * Sandro Santilli
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/content/development/rfcs/rfc02.md b/content/development/rfcs/rfc02.md
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..631be51
--- /dev/null
+++ b/content/development/rfcs/rfc02.md
@@ -0,0 +1,211 @@
+---
+title: "RFC-2: Alignment Ideas"
+author: Paul Ramsey
+category: rfcs
+date: "2008-10-31"
+draft: false
+type: rfc
+relatedInSidebar: false
+singlecolumn: true
+sidebar: false
+geekdocHidden: true
+geekdocHiddenTocTree: false
+---
+
+Getting into Alignment
+----------------------
+
+- Goal 1: Get our on-disk format aligned, so that we can read directly out of it after it has been brought into memory.
+- Goal 2: Sacrifice as little of the compactness of the current scheme as possible
+- Goal 3: Retain the ability to represent structures like GEOMETRYCOLLECTION(GEOMETRYCOLLECTION(...))
+
+
+PG_LWGEOM/LWGEOM
+----------------
+
+Right now, PG_LWGEOM is just an LWGEOM with an extra 4-bytes of information tacked onto the front.  The "align" keyword in CREATE TYPE is guaranteed to align the complete PG structure, so the front of the PG_LWGEOM can be guaranteed to be on an alignment boundary.  That means that the front of the LWGEOM will be four-bytes *off* the boundary.
+
+The simplest fix is to make our LWGEOM/PG_LWGEOM be the same struct, and have LWGEOM carry around the PG_LWGEOM 'size' attribute, even though there is not internal use for it. It can be "application data", where most of the time the application is PostgreSQL.
+
+Since our main goal is the keep size-on-disk down, increasing our size-in-memory for non-PostgreSQL applications of liblwgeom seems like a reasonable trade-off.
+
+TYPE
+----
+
+The type char at the head of the serialized form is a problem. By expanding it to 2-bytes, and in combination with some 2-byte length fields further down, we can achieve alignment at the cost of just 1 extra byte. See below in SRID for an approach that combines type and srid to reduce the cost to 1 byte.
+
+BBOX
+----
+
+Because the bbox is 4 floats ( = 2 doubles ) wide, we can ignore it. The fact that it is optional is not a problem, adding or removing it does not change the alignment of anything.
+
+SRID
+----
+
+Right now the SRID is optional and 4 bytes.  That's a problem, because it knocks us in/out of alignment depending on its presence. I see two approaches:
+
+-- Make it smaller and mandatory.
+
+o Reduce it to 2 bytes, and expand the type byte to 2 bytes, and you have a 4-byte block that should be easy to add to another 4-byte block to get aligned.
+o Reduce it to 3 bytes, and use the spare bit in the type char for extra geometry types.
+
+Currently, none of the SRID values in the EPSG database exceed 32000, so they fit into an unsigned short (65536). With three bytes, SRID can be as large as 16M.  Users will have filled in their spatial_ref_sys tables with god-knows-what, however.
+
+-- Make it larger and keep it optional.
+
+Doubling SRID to 8-bytes makes it a no-pain optional field, like the bbox, but at 4-byte cost.  However, since most geometries in production *do* carry SRID information, this is a size hit that will likely apply to many users.
+
+LENGTHS
+-------
+
+Lengths (ordinate array lengths, ring counts, sub-object counts) are the hardest thing to deal with. They are 4-bytes long and they mostly come one at a time, which has the effect of misaligning the structure each and every time we hit one.
+
+- Basic fix, simply pad all the lengths out to 8 bytes.
+- More complex fix, move to a serialized form more like the shape file, which stores all the offsets in one block at the front, and then all the doubles in one uninterrupted set afterwards. That means the net lack of alignment for a given group of offsets is only ever four bytes at the most.
+
+
+FULLY PADDED EXAMPLES
+---------------------
+
+The simplest approach is to pad out everything as needed. Here is what things look like for some examples. The leanest features (2d points, two-vertex 2d lines) take the biggest hit, as expected. The balance between speed increase gained from aligned access versus lost to disk I/O is going to require some empirical testing, unfortunately.
+
+:: POINT2D ::
+
+<int> Pg VarSize
+<int> type
+<longlong> srid
+<double> X
+<double> Y
+
+Old size: 25 bytes
+New size: 32 bytes (28% larger)
+
+:: LINESTRING2D (w/ bbox and srid) ::
+
+<int> Pg VarSize
+<int> type
+<longlong> srid
+<float><float> bbox mins
+<float><float> bbox maxs
+<longlong> npoints
+<double> X0
+<double> Y0
+<double> X1
+<double> Y1
+
+Old size: 61 bytes
+New size: 72 bytes (18% larger)
+
+:: POLYGON2D (w/ bbox and srid) ::
+
+<int> Pg VarSize
+<int> type
+<longlong> srid
+<float><float> bbox mins
+<float><float> bbox maxs
+<longlong> nrings
+<longlong> npoints
+<double> X0
+<double> Y0
+<double> X1
+<double> Y1
+<double> X2
+<double> Y2
+<double> X3
+<double> Y3
+
+Old size: 97 bytes
+New size: 112 bytes (15% larger)
+
+
+:: MULTILINESTRING2D (w/ bbox and srid and just one part) ::
+
+Note that the bbox and srid are dropped from the subgeometry.
+
+<int> Pg VarSize
+<int> type
+<longlong> srid
+<float><float> bbox mins
+<float><float> bbox maxs
+<longlong> nlines
+<int> Pg VarSize
+<int> type
+<longlong> npoints
+<double> X0
+<double> Y0
+<double> X1
+<double> Y1
+
+Old size: 66 bytes
+New size: 88 bytes (33% larger)
+
+
+SCRUNCHED HEADER EXAMPLES
+-------------------------
+
+Keeping the "type" at 8 bits, and reducing "srid" to 24 bits, scrunches that metadata complex into a single 32-bit space. Because SRID is made mandatory, a bit is also freed up in "type" for more geometry types.
+
+:: POINT2D ::
+
+<int> Pg VarSize
+<int> type / srid
+<double> X
+<double> Y
+
+Old size: 25 bytes
+New size: 24 bytes (4% smaller)
+
+:: LINESTRING2D (w/ bbox and srid) ::
+
+<int> Pg VarSize
+<int> type / srid
+<float><float> bbox mins
+<float><float> bbox maxs
+<longlong> npoints
+<double> X0
+<double> Y0
+<double> X1
+<double> Y1
+
+Old size: 61 bytes
+New size: 64 bytes (5% larger)
+
+:: POLYGON2D (w/ bbox and srid) ::
+
+<int> Pg VarSize
+<int> type / srid
+<float><float> bbox mins
+<float><float> bbox maxs
+<longlong> nrings
+<longlong> npoints
+<double> X0
+<double> Y0
+<double> X1
+<double> Y1
+<double> X2
+<double> Y2
+<double> X3
+<double> Y3
+
+Old size: 97 bytes
+New size: 104 bytes (7% larger)
+
+:: MULTILINESTRING2D (w/ bbox and srid and just one part) ::
+
+Note that the bbox and srid are dropped from the subgeometry.
+
+<int> Pg VarSize
+<int> type / srid
+<float><float> bbox mins
+<float><float> bbox maxs
+<longlong> nlines
+<int> Pg VarSize
+<int> type / srid
+<longlong> npoints
+<double> X0
+<double> Y0
+<double> X1
+<double> Y1
+
+Old size: 66 bytes
+New size: 80 bytes (21% larger)
diff --git a/content/development/rfcs/rfc05.md b/content/development/rfcs/rfc05.md
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..1bc9523
--- /dev/null
+++ b/content/development/rfcs/rfc05.md
@@ -0,0 +1,149 @@
+---
+title: "RFC-5: PostGIS Core Contributor Guidelines"
+author: Regina Obe
+version: 2.0
+category: rfcs
+date: "2022-03-21"
+draft: false
+type: rfc
+relatedInSidebar: false
+singlecolumn: true
+sidebar: false
+geekdocHidden: true
+geekdocHiddenTocTree: false
+---
+
+# Changes to this file
+This RFC should be only changed by PostGIS PSC members. All PSC members must agree to the terms of the changes before the change is considered final except in the case of wording changes and formatting that do not alter the terms of the guidelines.
+
+# Purpose
+To formalize source tree access, and specify some guidelines for primary source committers and patch submitters.
+
+# Election to Core Contributors Group
+ Permission for write source tree access to our primary repo (​https://git.osgeo.org/gitea/postgis/postgis.git) shall be provided to contributors only if accepted by the PostGIS Project Steering Committee. A proposal should be written to the PSC for new contributors and voted on normally. It is not necessary to write an RFC document for these votes, a proposal to postgis-dev is sufficient. After approval, the approved contributor shall be given write access to the PostGIS source repo and also added to the documentation under the section ​Core Contributors Present
+
+Removal of write access should be handled by the same process.
+
+The contributor should have demonstrated commitment to PostGIS and knowledge of the PostGIS source code and processes to the committee's satisfaction, usually by reporting bugs, submitting patches, and/or actively participating in the PostGIS mailing list(s).
+
+The contributor should also be prepared to support any new feature or changes in future releases that the contributor commits to the PostGIS source tree, or to find someone to which to delegate responsibility to should the contributor stop being available to support the portions of code the contributor is responsible for.
+
+All core contributors should also be a member of the postgis-dev mailing list so they can stay informed on policies, technical developments and release preparation.
+
+New core contributors are responsible for having read, and understood this document.
+
+# Code and Documentation Conventions
+
+* C code should follow our designated ​Style Guidelines to the best of your abilities
+* To accomplish Guidelines standards, we have implemented the use of ​editorconfig. Our repo as of version 2.4 now contains a .editorconfig file which editors configured with editorconfig support abide by.
+* We ask all developers to work with an editor that has editorconfig support. Many editors have it or have it as plugins.
+* All source code in GIT should be in Unix text format as opposed to DOS text mode with possible exception of .bat files.
+* Each new/changed function should be documented in the official docs following our [Documentation Guidelines](https://trac.osgeo.org/postgis/wiki/DevWikiDocNewFeature)
+
+# Repo Administrator
+One member of the Project Steering Committee will be designated as the Repo Administrator. That person will be responsible for giving write access to folks, updating the CREDITS, and other repo related management.
+
+Paul Ramsey is currently designated as the Repo Administrator.
+
+# Commit and Bug, Feature Tracking Practices
+
+The following are considered good source commit and tracking practices for the PostGIS project.
+
+  1. Use meaningful descriptions for commit log entries. Format the git log to have a succint oneline description optionally followed by a detailed description after an empty line. Keep lines within 70 columns. Include trac ticket references in the detailed description. Ticket references will be signaled to trac so they can close tickets if "Closes #xxx" is found in the commit log or only result in comments if "References #xxx" is found. References to pull requests are better encoded as full links.
+  2. We allow contributions via patches (on trac or via mailing lists) or pull requests from our primary or [CodeMirrors git mirrors].  If you are given a patch or pull request from a community person, make sure to keep their names in the commit log (`git commit --author "Name Surname <email>"`) and NEWS file. DO NOT USE the `MERGE` button on [CodeMirrors git mirrors] as mirrors will be overridden and the merged commit will be discarded; merge manually to official repo instead.
+  3. We use https://trac.osgeo.org/postgis for planning so make sure pending changes have tickets there so they are not overlooked when cutting releases. If you forget to add trac ticket references in a commit log, edit the trac ticket and put the notes in, such as "Fixed in master ..git hash and in branches/3.0 <githas>". The 'r' character enables Trac to create a hyperlink from the ticket to the changeset.
+  4. Make sure the NEWS file is updated in master branch for new features/breaking changes and in all the stable branches for bugfixes.
+  5. Never commit new features to a stable branch without permission of the PSC or release manager. Normally only fixes should go into stable branches.
+  6. New features go in the master branch.
+  7. Only bug fixes should be committed to the master branch during pre-release code freeze, without permission from the PSC or release manager.
+  8. Significant changes to the master branch, in particular breaking backward-compatibility, should be discussed on the postgis-dev list before you make them, and larger changes will require an RFC approved by the PSC.
+  9. As a general rule, do not create new branches in the official repository. An exception to this rule is for when you want all CI bots to test your changes before pushing them to the target branch, in which case prefix your branch with a `test/` string.
+  10. When committing new features or significant changes to existing source code, the committer should take reasonable measures to insure that the source code continues to build and work on the most commonly supported platforms (currently Linux, FreeBSD, Mac, and Windows), either by testing on those platforms directly, running CI tests, or by getting help from other developers working on those platforms. If new files or library dependencies are added, then the configure.in, Makefile.in and related documentations should be kept up to date.
+  11. After each commit, verify that all the build bots are happy on this page - https://trac.osgeo.org/postgis/ and if their unhappiness is caused by your commit, fix the issue before making any other changes.
+
+
+# Committer Tracking
+
+A list of all core contributors is listed in the manual under the section "Core Contributors Present" in file doc/introduction.xml. This will be the responsibility of the PSC to keep up to date:
+
+* Full name: the users actual name.
+* A brief indication of areas of responsibility.
+
+This will be the responsibility of the documentation lead (currently Regina Obe) to manage. All stable non-EOL'd documents should list this information for core contributors.
+
+# Projects under PostGIS umbrella
+
+The PostGIS project has 3 additional sub-projects under it's umbrella.  These projects may be impacted by changes in the core PostGIS project and have their own community of developers.
+
+Current list of these are:
+
+* Docker PostGIS - (https://github.com/postgis/docker-postgis) community managed docker builds of PostGIS.
+* PostGIS Java - ( https://github.com/postgis/postgis-java ) Java bindings for PostGIS
+* PostGIS Workshop (https://github.com/postgis/postgis-workshops) - Workshop material for PostGIS
+
+# Relationship with other Projects
+
+Some parts of the PostGIS code base are dependent on other upsteam projects or other projects rely heavily on functionality in PostGIS. Changes in those areas should go first into those upstream projects and then applied to PostGIS. In event of major changes to PostGIS, said projects should be regression tested (before a PostGIS release) to ensure the latest version still works with the latest RTM version of PostGIS.
+
+Currently the list of those areas is :
+
+* postgresql ( https://www.postgresql.org)
+* geos ( https://libgeos.org)
+* proj ( https://proj.org)
+* gdal ( https://gdal.org)
+* sfcgal (https://sfcgal.org)
+
+GIS FOSS suites that may be impacted by PostGIS major release:
+* mapserver (https://mapserver.org)
+* geoserver (https://geoserver.org)
+* openjump (http://openjump.org)
+* qgis (https://qgis.org)
+* gvSig (https://www.gvsig.org)
+* pgRouting (https://www.pgrouting.org/)
+* mobilitydb (https://mobilitydb.com/)
+* pgpointcloud (https://github.com/pgpointcloud)
+* osm2pgsql + other openstreetmap components (mapnik etc) (https://www.openstreetmap.org/)
+
+
+# Legal
+
+Core contributors are the front line gatekeepers to keep the code base clear of improperly contributed code. It is important to the PostGIS users, developers and the OSGeo foundation to avoid contributing any code to the project without it being clearly licensed under the project license.
+
+Generally speaking the key issues are that those providing code to be included in the repository understand that the code will be released under the original GPL license, and that the person providing the code has the right to contribute the code. The core contributor that accepts and committs the code should verify the understanding of the contributor unless the committer is very comfortable that the contributor understands the license (for instance frequent contributors).
+
+If the contribution was developed on behalf of an employer (on work time, as part of a work project, etc) then it is important that an appropriate representative of the employer understand that the code will be contributed under the GPL license. The arrangement should be cleared with an authorized supervisor/manager, etc.
+
+The code should be developed by the contributor, or the code should be from a source which can be rightfully contributed such as from the public domain, or from an open source project under a compatible license.
+
+All unusual situations need to be discussed and/or documented.
+
+Core contributors should adhere to the following guidelines, and may be personally legally liable for improperly contributing code to the source repository:
+
+* Make sure the contributor (and possibly employer) is aware of the contribution terms.
+* Code coming from a source other than the contributor (such as adapted from another project) should be clearly marked as to the original source, copyright holders, license terms and so forth. This information can be in the file headers, but should also be added to the project licensing file if not exactly matching normal project licensing.
+* Existing copyright headers and license text should never be stripped from a file. If a copyright holder wishes to give up copyright they must do so in writing to the OSGeo foundation before copyright messages are removed. If license terms are changed it has to be by agreement (written in email is ok) of the copyright holders.
+* Code with licenses requiring credit, or disclosure to users should be added to LICENSE.TXT.
+* When substantial contributions are added to a file (such as substantial patches) the author/contributor should be added to the list of copyright holders for the file.
+* If there is uncertainty about whether a change is proper to contribute to the code base, please seek more information from the project steering committee, or the foundation legal counsel.
+* New contributors and company contributors should be added to the credits in doc/introduction.xml of the latest release of the PostGIS manual.
+* It is the responsibility of the document lead to ensure when new enhancements are added or breaking changes are made, these are noted in the relevant branch/NEWS as soon as conveniently possible. The note should include the trac # (unless a major feature with many tickets) and contributors to the feature/change.
+
+# Bootstrapping
+
+The following existing committers will be considered authorized PostGIS committers as long as they each review the committer guidelines, and agree to adhere to them. The administrator will be responsible for checking with each person. Current committers are listed in alphabetical order with (P) to denote current Project Steering Committee members
+**TODO: this might have been the boot strap but not current developer list not sure we even need a bootstrap here **
+
+* Jorge Arévalo
+* Nicklas Avén
+* Mark Cave-Ayland (P)
+* Olivier Courtin
+* Chris Hodgson (P)
+* Mark Leslie
+* Mateusz Loskot
+* Kevin Neufeld
+* Regina Obe  (P) Documentation Lead
+* Bborie Park (P)
+* Pierre Racine
+* Paul Ramsey (P) SVN Administrator
+* Sandro Santilli (P)
+* David Zwarg

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Summary of changes:
 content/development/rfcs/_index.md |   8 ++
 content/development/rfcs/rfc01.md  | 150 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 content/development/rfcs/rfc02.md  | 211 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 content/development/rfcs/rfc05.md  | 149 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 4 files changed, 518 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644 content/development/rfcs/_index.md
 create mode 100644 content/development/rfcs/rfc01.md
 create mode 100644 content/development/rfcs/rfc02.md
 create mode 100644 content/development/rfcs/rfc05.md


hooks/post-receive
-- 
postgis.net