[Tilecache] Sandbox please

[Christopher Schmidt]

On Sat, Mar 24, 2007 at 10:25:26AM +1100, Cameron Shorter wrote:
> <CameronShorter> Ie, with regard to ownership, accepting software 
> developers, whether TileCache is going to be incorporated into the 
> OpenLayers SVN directory, Who is going to manage the TileCache project - 
> will it be the OpenLayers PSC or Metacarta or will a seperate PSC be set up?

MetaCarta holds the copyright on TileCache as it stands right now. It
was a project Schuyler and I worked on as part of working for MetaCarta.
There is unlikely to be a PSC for TileCache. It is not considered part
of OpenLayers, and it is unlikely to be treated in the same way that
OpenLayers has been treated. 

So long as I'm working at MetaCarta, I expect that I will be the primary
point of contact for TileCache. If this changes, I'll let the mailing
list know.

> My reason for asking is that our company, Lisasoft is planning to use 
> TileCache for our future services, and we are keen to see its 
> development continue and are likely to contribute to the code base, test 
> cases, and support.

Sounds great. I look forward to the participation in the trac instance.
There are a number of tools for managing local modifications to software
as part of the development process: I've had many good experiences with
SVK, personally, for managing local changes to SVN-based software.

> 
> I'm surprised you have suggested Bill put TileCache into the OpenLayers 
> SVN sandbox. This seems to suggest:

What it suggests is that Bill is working out a bug with TileCache and
OpenLayers, and since his solution is designed primarily for OpenLayers,
that development is relevant to the OpenLayers project. Additional
materials developed for use in OpenLayers applications are, in my
opinion, suitable for the OpenLayers SVN repository. This is my opinion,
and may be refuted by the OpenLayers PSC at any time. It says little on
the TileCache project status.

> 1. You are wanting to merge OpenLayers and TileCache, or

No plans to do so at the moment. 

> 2. You don't want to open up the TileCache developer base, or

Yes. 

> 3. TileCache is a low priority and has not been given the Sys Admin 
> support it needs, or

I don't think this is neccesarily true, but it is part of the reason for
2. Time devoted to maintaining additional SVN repositories when I have 
thus far seen no benefit from doing so is time taken away that I could
be working on actually hacking the code. As far as I know there are no
outstanding patches in the TileCache trac, and anyone who has written a
patch (with sufficient documentation) thus far has seen their patch
integrated within days, if not hours.

What it comes down to is that I don't see a need for TileCache to leave
the Cathedral method of development. OpenLayers had that need, so it
changed. Should TileCache demonstrate that need, TileCache will change. 

Regards,
-- 
Christopher Schmidt
MetaCarta