[fdo-internals] FDO Incubation Progress Reports

Greg Boone greg.boone at autodesk.com
Thu Mar 15 11:35:14 EDT 2007

No problem. I just wanted to clarify the situation. As for the
straw-horse RFC process, it sounds acceptable to me. I will endeavor to
use such a mechanism when developing new proposals from scratch.





From: fdo-internals-bounces at lists.osgeo.org
[mailto:fdo-internals-bounces at lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Jason Birch
Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2007 12:49 AM
To: FDO Internals Mail List
Subject: RE: [fdo-internals] FDO Incubation Progress Reports


Thanks Greg,


It's quite possible that I misrepresented your intentions in that
comment, and I apologize for that.  I also agree that it would be great
to pick up additional developers.


I don't think that this kind of reaction will happen once the project's
mojo is charged up and everything is communicated out front.  OTOH, I
actually prefer straw-horse RFCs to having to help design new features
from scratch...  Perhaps an informal request-for-ideas phase would be
something to think about though.  


Hmm. I've wandered off topic again...






From: fdo-internals-bounces at lists.osgeo.org on behalf of Greg Boone
Sent: Wed 2007-03-14 9:16 PM
To: FDO Internals Mail List
Subject: RE: [fdo-internals] FDO Incubation Progress Reports

Hi Jason,


I welcome all feedback community members have on the Python scripts. If
there are developers that have concerns about the usage of SWIG to
generate the python scripts then I encourage them to join the FDO
community and work to make the implementation a better one. There is no
mandate to use SWIG so I am sure the existing FDO community would be
open to discussing other alternatives.


The python scripts were submitted using SWIG simply because Autodesk had
the script generation process sitting in house from a pre-existing
development effort and I figured it was a waste to have them just
sitting there not being used when we had no python support in FDO at
all. I felt it was better to throw it over the wall and have the
community shoot at it rather than keeping it locked up. I think it is a
useful mechanism to pull in other developers and get them interested in
FDO. Basically, all I had to do was re-package the script generation
process for open-source, integrate into the build process and submit. 


Once again, the submission is not intended to be a fait-accomplis or
intended to circumvent community discussion. I encourage developers who
are interested to join the community and work to make FDO better. As I
see it, this would be a great opportunity to add a new developer to the



	-----Original Message----- 
	From: fdo-internals-bounces at lists.osgeo.org on behalf of Jason
	Sent: Wed 3/14/2007 8:03 PM 
	To: FDO Internals Mail List 
	Subject: RE: [fdo-internals] FDO Incubation Progress Reports

	If the group can't come up with any other suggestions, I'd be
happy to
	I'm starting to use FDO pretty heavily through MapGuide, Haris'
	work, and eventually possibly on its own.  I think it's
important that
	the committee put in place some additional members, and that
	members are active on the mailing lists.  FDO has been
	dormant from a community perspective for too long, and I feel
that this
	is hurting the project, and possibly even turning off the
developers who
	_have_ chosen to participate heavily in this area.  If FDO is
run as a
	software product with too much command&control, then I have
doubts about
	whether it will be able to achieve its full potential.
	I'd also like to see some community outreach by FDO folks.  In
	particular, some of the response to the initial Python support
has been
	unfavourable, and the FDO project could definitely benefit by
	interacting with these community experts.
	-----Original Message-----
	From: fdo-internals-bounces at lists.osgeo.org
	[mailto:fdo-internals-bounces at lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Greg
	Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2007 13:06
	To: FDO Internals Mail List
	Subject: RE: [fdo-internals] FDO Incubation Progress Reports
	If we vote Harris to the PSC then that would give us 6 PSC
members. I
	believe it would be nice to have an odd number so that votes do
not end
	in deadlock. Therefore I would suggest that we fill both open
	at the same time.
	fdo-internals mailing list
	fdo-internals at lists.osgeo.org

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/fdo-internals/attachments/20070315/f07f934c/attachment-0001.html

More information about the fdo-internals mailing list