[fdo-internals] fdogdal <Bounds> support for 3.2.x

[Jason Birch]

I think that many serious users of MapGuide Open Source will benefit from these changes.  However, we may be a bit late in the MapGuide release cycle for 1.2 to bring in a new FDO "version".  I'd personally support it if the raster provider is the only thing changing though.
 
An alternative would be to build a version of FDO or just the GDAL provider that could be dropped into existing MapGuide 1.2.0 installations.  This would be a good time to also expose the interface required for the MrSID plugins as part of the default GDAL provider build, so that a separate gdal.dll is not required to support this plugin.  My concern with this approach would be that users would not get the "enhanced experience" by default with MGOS, and might drop it without knowing that there IS a better way :)
 
Jason

________________________________

From: Greg Boone
Subject: RE: [fdo-internals] fdogdal <Bounds> support for 3.2.x



I think we need to start a dialog with our primary client for the
branch, MapGuide OpenSource and see how they wish to proceed.

Options:

1) Have a 3.2.3 release from 3.2.x
2) Branch 3.2.x and release from the new branch
3) Issue a special service pack instead of a full release.
4) ....

Greg

-----Original Message-----
From: Frank Warmerdam (External)
Subject: [fdo-internals] fdogdal <Bounds> support for 3.2.x

Folks,

I have prepared a patch implementing <bounds> support in the config file
for the fdogdal provider.  Jason has done some testing, and verified it
substantially improves performance in cases where many files are used
for
a single layer in MapGuide.

I have prepared a ticket with the patch, and I am seeking permission to
apply it to fdogdal's 3.2.x branch.

Do we intend to have an fdo 3.2.3 release?  If so, I think we should
create
a corresponding milestone in Trac, and I would see this going into that.
In the meantime, it would be possible to compile a custom
GRFPProvider.dll
against 3.2.x and use it with mapguide 1.2.0 (with fdo 3.2.2).

How shall we decide to handle such relatively substantial changes in our
stable branches?  A vote of the PSC?

   http://trac.osgeo.org/fdo/ticket/87


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/ms-tnef
Size: 5207 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/fdo-internals/attachments/20070613/7a47ccb4/attachment.bin