[fdo-internals] RFC 27 - Passed

[Kenneth Skovhede, GEOGRAF A/S]

I can say that the way Maestro is placed under the same trac instance 
makes some problems.
I imagine it is annoying to get commit messages from Maestro, if you are 
working on MapGuide.
I can also see that I get confused when I get a trac ticket that does 
not explicitly say "Maestro".
There seems to a number of tickets that initally gets assigned to 
something other than Maestro.
The version numbering does not work well, since Maestro and MapGuide 
uses different version numberings.

Like Zac notes, it is also difficult to find stuff that is specific to 
either project.

Are there stuff that the Fusion team belives would work better if they 
shared the trac with MapGuide?

Regards, Kenneth Skovhede, GEOGRAF A/S



Zac Spitzer skrev:
> 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 
> <mailto: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 <http://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 <mailto: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
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> fdo-internals mailing list
> fdo-internals at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/fdo-internals
>   

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/fdo-internals/attachments/20081107/995e7872/attachment.html