[fdo-internals] RFC 27 - Passed

[Zac Spitzer]

As a general question here, would it make more sense to create a separate
trac instance
for FDO toolbox?

I am thinking specifically about how this has gone with the mapguide
project, fusion for example
was moved to a seperate instance, whilst maestro still lives under mapguide.

It makes it's harder to track core mapguide stuff via timelines and the like
due to the volume
or maestro specific stuff..

Thoughts?

z


On Thu, Nov 6, 2008 at 3:48 PM, Jason Birch <Jason.Birch at nanaimo.ca> wrote:

> RFC 27 for bringing FDO Toolbox into the FDO fold has passed, with support
> from Greg, Haris, Frank, Orest, and Jason, which is as good as unanimous
> these days :)
>
> As soon as the code can be migrated to our SVN and binaries posted on
> download.osgeo.org, I would like to see an announcement go out via the
> OSGeo news queue.
>
> http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/News_Queue
>
> I can draft this if there are no other volunteers.
>
> Jason
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: Jason Birch
> Subject: RE: [fdo-internals] RFC 27 for review
>
> Given that we've heard from most of the PSC and there has been no
> negative feedback, I would like to move to accept RFC 27:
>
>  http://trac.osgeo.org/fdo/wiki/FDORfc27
>
> +1 Jason
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> fdo-internals mailing list
> fdo-internals at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/fdo-internals
>
>


-- 
Zac Spitzer -
http://zacster.blogspot.com (My Blog)
+61 405 847 168
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/fdo-internals/attachments/20081107/d895b706/attachment.html