From theduckylittle at gmail.com Sun Aug 2 09:54:34 2026 From: theduckylittle at gmail.com (Dan Little) Date: Sun, 2 Aug 2026 11:54:34 -0500 Subject: [geomoose-psc] Pull Request Review Request! Message-ID: Hi Folks! I've got a few pull requests that have had some good work put into them, I think are good enhancements, and were also sponsored work. I'd love to get them reviewed, merged, and released. This is a "stack" of PRs that would add back the feature report: - https://github.com/geomoose/gm3/pull/999 : Restores the "print to scale" functionality. I've updated this with the curated list from the PSC suggestions. - https://github.com/geomoose/gm3/pull/1000 : This is marked as merging into 999 because it made testing of the tick lines a bit easier. This cleans up the PDF scale line to match the updated scale line on the map. I feel this one is an easy one to review. - https://github.com/geomoose/gm3/pull/1013 : Last but not least, the return of the feature report! This adds a sample feature report and layout to the parcels layer along with all the appropriate docs. After some feedback from folks (DM/emails) I did take the time to "promote" the basemap toggle to a mainline component. I think the "experiemental" status made it scary and left us not testing it (which is why we needed a react 18 fix for it in the first place): - https://github.com/geomoose/gm3/pull/1015 Last but not least I've drafted a first AI/LLM policy here: - https://github.com/geomoose/gm3/pull/1016 Thanks y'all! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jmckenna at gatewaygeomatics.com Mon Aug 3 06:36:34 2026 From: jmckenna at gatewaygeomatics.com (Jeff McKenna) Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2026 10:36:34 -0300 Subject: [geomoose-psc] Pull Request Review Request! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Thanks Dan. Regarding the LLM policy, I like the note from GDAL/EvanR regarding unnecessary verbose comments etc as part of AI-generated pull requests (I see this in MapServer often now): "The typical high verbosity of LLM code and text is actively discouraged. More code is more code to maintain." (I added that into your pull request) thanks, -jeff On 2026-08-02 1:54 p.m., Dan Little via geomoose-psc wrote: > Hi Folks! > > I've got a few pull requests that have had some good work put into them, > I think are good enhancements, and were also sponsored work. I'd love to > get them reviewed, merged, and released. > > This is a "stack" of PRs that would add back the feature report: > > - https://github.com/geomoose/gm3/pull/999 gm3/pull/999> : Restores the "print to scale" functionality. I've > updated this with the curated list from the PSC suggestions. > - https://github.com/geomoose/gm3/pull/1000 geomoose/gm3/pull/1000> : This is marked as merging into 999 because it > made testing of the tick lines a bit easier. This cleans up the PDF > scale line to match the updated scale line on the map. I feel this one > is an easy one to review. > - https://github.com/geomoose/gm3/pull/1013 geomoose/gm3/pull/1013> : Last but not least, the return of the feature > report! This adds a sample feature report and layout to the parcels > layer along with all the appropriate docs. > > After some feedback from folks (DM/emails) I did take the time to > "promote" the basemap toggle to a mainline component. I think the > "experiemental" status made it scary and left us not testing it (which > is why we needed a react 18 fix for it in the first place): > - https://github.com/geomoose/gm3/pull/1015 geomoose/gm3/pull/1015> > > Last but not least I've drafted a first AI/LLM policy here: > - https://github.com/geomoose/gm3/pull/1016 geomoose/gm3/pull/1016> > > Thanks y'all! > > _______________________________________________ > geomoose-psc mailing list > geomoose-psc at lists.osgeo.org > https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geomoose-psc -- Jeff McKenna GatewayGeo: Developers of MS4W, & offering MapServer Consulting/Dev co-founder of FOSS4G http://gatewaygeo.com/ From theduckylittle at gmail.com Mon Aug 3 10:19:52 2026 From: theduckylittle at gmail.com (Dan Little) Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2026 12:19:52 -0500 Subject: [geomoose-psc] Pull Request Review Request! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Great addition! Thank you! On Mon, Aug 3, 2026 at 8:46?AM Jeff McKenna via geomoose-psc < geomoose-psc at lists.osgeo.org> wrote: > Thanks Dan. Regarding the LLM policy, I like the note from GDAL/EvanR > regarding unnecessary verbose comments etc as part of AI-generated pull > requests (I see this in MapServer often now): > > "The typical high verbosity of LLM code and text is actively > discouraged. More code is more code to maintain." > > (I added that into your pull request) > > thanks, > > -jeff > > > > On 2026-08-02 1:54 p.m., Dan Little via geomoose-psc wrote: > > Hi Folks! > > > > I've got a few pull requests that have had some good work put into them, > > I think are good enhancements, and were also sponsored work. I'd love to > > get them reviewed, merged, and released. > > > > This is a "stack" of PRs that would add back the feature report: > > > > - https://github.com/geomoose/gm3/pull/999 > gm3/pull/999> : Restores the "print to scale" functionality. I've > > updated this with the curated list from the PSC suggestions. > > - https://github.com/geomoose/gm3/pull/1000 > geomoose/gm3/pull/1000> : This is marked as merging into 999 because it > > made testing of the tick lines a bit easier. This cleans up the PDF > > scale line to match the updated scale line on the map. I feel this one > > is an easy one to review. > > - https://github.com/geomoose/gm3/pull/1013 > geomoose/gm3/pull/1013> : Last but not least, the return of the feature > > report! This adds a sample feature report and layout to the parcels > > layer along with all the appropriate docs. > > > > After some feedback from folks (DM/emails) I did take the time to > > "promote" the basemap toggle to a mainline component. I think the > > "experiemental" status made it scary and left us not testing it (which > > is why we needed a react 18 fix for it in the first place): > > - https://github.com/geomoose/gm3/pull/1015 > geomoose/gm3/pull/1015> > > > > Last but not least I've drafted a first AI/LLM policy here: > > - https://github.com/geomoose/gm3/pull/1016 > geomoose/gm3/pull/1016> > > > > Thanks y'all! > > > > _______________________________________________ > > geomoose-psc mailing list > > geomoose-psc at lists.osgeo.org > > https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geomoose-psc > > > -- > Jeff McKenna > GatewayGeo: Developers of MS4W, & offering MapServer Consulting/Dev > co-founder of FOSS4G > http://gatewaygeo.com/ > _______________________________________________ > geomoose-psc mailing list > geomoose-psc at lists.osgeo.org > https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geomoose-psc > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From klassen.js at gmail.com Mon Aug 17 12:04:21 2026 From: klassen.js at gmail.com (Jim Klassen) Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2026 14:04:21 -0500 Subject: [geomoose-psc] Pull Request Review Request! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <3e4beb50-beea-412e-a69e-92364820aae6@gmail.com> I was (finally) able to get through these.? ?I've added a couple of comments, and it looks like others have some unanswered comments too.? Generally, I like where these PRs are going, and I'd like to get these merged before they stack up so deep that we've effectively forked our own project, but I am looking for some consensus from the PSC before I do so. On 8/2/26 11:54 AM, Dan Little via geomoose-psc wrote: > Hi Folks! > > I've got a few pull requests that have had some good work put into them, I think are good enhancements, and were also sponsored work. I'd love to get them reviewed, merged, and released. > > This is a "stack" of PRs that would add back the feature report: > > - https://github.com/geomoose/gm3/pull/999 : Restores the "print to scale" functionality. I've updated this with the curated list from the PSC suggestions. > - https://github.com/geomoose/gm3/pull/1000 : This is marked as merging into 999 because it made testing of the tick lines a bit easier. This cleans up the PDF scale line to match the updated scale line on the map. I feel this one is an easy one to review. > - https://github.com/geomoose/gm3/pull/1013 : Last but not least, the return of the feature report! This adds a sample feature report and layout to the parcels layer along with all the appropriate docs. > > After some feedback from folks (DM/emails) I did take the time to "promote" the basemap toggle to a mainline component. I think the "experiemental" status made it scary and left us not testing it (which is why we needed a react 18 fix for it in the first place): > - https://github.com/geomoose/gm3/pull/1015 > > Last but not least I've drafted a first AI/LLM policy here: > - https://github.com/geomoose/gm3/pull/1016 > > Thanks y'all! > > _______________________________________________ > geomoose-psc mailing list > geomoose-psc at lists.osgeo.org > https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geomoose-psc From tchaddad at gmail.com Mon Aug 17 12:07:09 2026 From: tchaddad at gmail.com (TC Haddad) Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2026 12:07:09 -0700 Subject: [geomoose-psc] Pull Request Review Request! In-Reply-To: <3e4beb50-beea-412e-a69e-92364820aae6@gmail.com> References: <3e4beb50-beea-412e-a69e-92364820aae6@gmail.com> Message-ID: We have a PSC meeting Friday, so maybe Jim?s email can serve as a nudge to everyone to take a look at these and either provide feedback ahead of or in time for Friday?s meeting? best, Tanya On Mon, Aug 17, 2026 at 12:04?PM Jim Klassen via geomoose-psc < geomoose-psc at lists.osgeo.org> wrote: > I was (finally) able to get through these. I've added a couple of > comments, and it looks like others have some unanswered comments too. > Generally, I like where these PRs are going, and I'd like to get these > merged before they stack up so deep that we've effectively forked our own > project, but I am looking for some consensus from the PSC before I do so. > > On 8/2/26 11:54 AM, Dan Little via geomoose-psc wrote: > > Hi Folks! > > > > I've got a few pull requests that have had some good work put into them, > I think are good enhancements, and were also sponsored work. I'd love to > get them reviewed, merged, and released. > > > > This is a "stack" of PRs that would add back the feature report: > > > > - https://github.com/geomoose/gm3/pull/999 : Restores the "print to > scale" functionality. I've updated this with the curated list from the PSC > suggestions. > > - https://github.com/geomoose/gm3/pull/1000 : This is marked as merging > into 999 because it made testing of the tick lines a bit easier. This > cleans up the PDF scale line to match the updated scale line on the map. I > feel this one is an easy one to review. > > - https://github.com/geomoose/gm3/pull/1013 : Last but not least, the > return of the feature report! This adds a sample feature report and layout > to the parcels layer along with all the appropriate docs. > > > > After some feedback from folks (DM/emails) I did take the time to > "promote" the basemap toggle to a mainline component. I think the > "experiemental" status made it scary and left us not testing it (which is > why we needed a react 18 fix for it in the first place): > > - https://github.com/geomoose/gm3/pull/1015 > > > > Last but not least I've drafted a first AI/LLM policy here: > > - https://github.com/geomoose/gm3/pull/1016 > > > > Thanks y'all! > > > > _______________________________________________ > > geomoose-psc mailing list > > geomoose-psc at lists.osgeo.org > > https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geomoose-psc > > _______________________________________________ > geomoose-psc mailing list > geomoose-psc at lists.osgeo.org > https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geomoose-psc > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From chughes at co.lincoln.or.us Mon Aug 17 13:26:25 2026 From: chughes at co.lincoln.or.us (Christopher Hughes) Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2026 20:26:25 +0000 Subject: [geomoose-psc] Pull Request Review Request! In-Reply-To: References: <3e4beb50-beea-412e-a69e-92364820aae6@gmail.com> Message-ID: I'll be out of town Friday so won't be able to attend the PSC meeting, but I've added feedback on most of the PRs. -- Chris Hughes GIS Analyst Lincoln County GIS Department 880 NE 7th St. l Newport, OR 97365 Tel: (541) 574 1283 ________________________________ From: geomoose-psc on behalf of TC Haddad via geomoose-psc Sent: Monday, August 17, 2026 12:07 PM To: Jim Klassen Cc: geomoose-psc at lists.osgeo.org Subject: Re: [geomoose-psc] Pull Request Review Request! We have a PSC meeting Friday, so maybe Jim?s email can serve as a nudge to everyone to take a look at these and either provide feedback ahead of or in time for Friday?s meeting? best, Tanya On Mon, Aug 17, 2026 at 12:04?PM Jim Klassen via geomoose-psc > wrote: I was (finally) able to get through these. I've added a couple of comments, and it looks like others have some unanswered comments too. Generally, I like where these PRs are going, and I'd like to get these merged before they stack up so deep that we've effectively forked our own project, but I am looking for some consensus from the PSC before I do so. On 8/2/26 11:54 AM, Dan Little via geomoose-psc wrote: > Hi Folks! > > I've got a few pull requests that have had some good work put into them, I think are good enhancements, and were also sponsored work. I'd love to get them reviewed, merged, and released. > > This is a "stack" of PRs that would add back the feature report: > > - https://github.com/geomoose/gm3/pull/999 : Restores the "print to scale" functionality. I've updated this with the curated list from the PSC suggestions. > - https://github.com/geomoose/gm3/pull/1000 : This is marked as merging into 999 because it made testing of the tick lines a bit easier. This cleans up the PDF scale line to match the updated scale line on the map. I feel this one is an easy one to review. > - https://github.com/geomoose/gm3/pull/1013 : Last but not least, the return of the feature report! This adds a sample feature report and layout to the parcels layer along with all the appropriate docs. > > After some feedback from folks (DM/emails) I did take the time to "promote" the basemap toggle to a mainline component. I think the "experiemental" status made it scary and left us not testing it (which is why we needed a react 18 fix for it in the first place): > - https://github.com/geomoose/gm3/pull/1015 > > Last but not least I've drafted a first AI/LLM policy here: > - https://github.com/geomoose/gm3/pull/1016 > > Thanks y'all! > > _______________________________________________ > geomoose-psc mailing list > geomoose-psc at lists.osgeo.org > https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geomoose-psc _______________________________________________ geomoose-psc mailing list geomoose-psc at lists.osgeo.org https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geomoose-psc -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tchaddad at gmail.com Mon Aug 17 13:34:24 2026 From: tchaddad at gmail.com (TC Haddad) Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2026 13:34:24 -0700 Subject: [geomoose-psc] Pull Request Review Request! In-Reply-To: References: <3e4beb50-beea-412e-a69e-92364820aae6@gmail.com> Message-ID: ? TC Haddad reacted via Gmail On Mon, Aug 17, 2026 at 1:26?PM Christopher Hughes wrote: > I'll be out of town Friday so won't be able to attend the PSC meeting, but > I've added feedback on most of the PRs. > > -- > Chris Hughes > > GIS Analyst > Lincoln County GIS Department > 880 NE 7th St. l Newport, OR 97365 > Tel: (541) 574 1283 > > ------------------------------ > *From:* geomoose-psc on behalf of > TC Haddad via geomoose-psc > *Sent:* Monday, August 17, 2026 12:07 PM > *To:* Jim Klassen > *Cc:* geomoose-psc at lists.osgeo.org > *Subject:* Re: [geomoose-psc] Pull Request Review Request! > > > We have a PSC meeting Friday, so maybe Jim?s email can serve as a nudge to > everyone to take a look at these and either provide feedback ahead of or in > time for Friday?s meeting? > > best, > Tanya > > On Mon, Aug 17, 2026 at 12:04?PM Jim Klassen via geomoose-psc < > geomoose-psc at lists.osgeo.org> wrote: > > I was (finally) able to get through these. I've added a couple of > comments, and it looks like others have some unanswered comments too. > Generally, I like where these PRs are going, and I'd like to get these > merged before they stack up so deep that we've effectively forked our own > project, but I am looking for some consensus from the PSC before I do so. > > On 8/2/26 11:54 AM, Dan Little via geomoose-psc wrote: > > Hi Folks! > > > > I've got a few pull requests that have had some good work put into them, > I think are good enhancements, and were also sponsored work. I'd love to > get them reviewed, merged, and released. > > > > This is a "stack" of PRs that would add back the feature report: > > > > - https://github.com/geomoose/gm3/pull/999 : Restores the "print to > scale" functionality. I've updated this with the curated list from the PSC > suggestions. > > - https://github.com/geomoose/gm3/pull/1000 : This is marked as merging > into 999 because it made testing of the tick lines a bit easier. This > cleans up the PDF scale line to match the updated scale line on the map. I > feel this one is an easy one to review. > > - https://github.com/geomoose/gm3/pull/1013 : Last but not least, the > return of the feature report! This adds a sample feature report and layout > to the parcels layer along with all the appropriate docs. > > > > After some feedback from folks (DM/emails) I did take the time to > "promote" the basemap toggle to a mainline component. I think the > "experiemental" status made it scary and left us not testing it (which is > why we needed a react 18 fix for it in the first place): > > - https://github.com/geomoose/gm3/pull/1015 > > > > Last but not least I've drafted a first AI/LLM policy here: > > - https://github.com/geomoose/gm3/pull/1016 > > > > Thanks y'all! > > > > _______________________________________________ > > geomoose-psc mailing list > > geomoose-psc at lists.osgeo.org > > https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geomoose-psc > > _______________________________________________ > geomoose-psc mailing list > geomoose-psc at lists.osgeo.org > https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geomoose-psc > > -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/vnd.google.email-reaction+json Size: 37 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tchaddad at gmail.com Tue Aug 18 12:30:20 2026 From: tchaddad at gmail.com (TC Haddad) Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2026 12:30:20 -0700 Subject: [geomoose-psc] PSC Meeting Friday August 21st, 2026 Message-ID: Happy August GeoMoosers, Hope your summers have been going well! We have a PSC meeting on Friday August 21, 2025 3:00PM Atlantic / 2:00PM Eastern / 1:00PM Central / Noon Mountain / 11:00AM Pacific For the agenda, we'll pick up the conversation from last month and also follow up on the open PRs. In addition, we should probably discuss if we will have a 2026 Sprint (or not), and if yes, what those Sprint options might be. Minutes from last month are here: https://github.com/geomoose/geomoose/wiki/PSC-meeting-2026-07-17 Stub for this month's meeting is here (feel free to edit): https://github.com/geomoose/geomoose/wiki/PSC-Meeting-2025-08-21 (Other agenda items welcome!) Minutes from all meetings can be found here: https://github.com/geomoose/geomoose/wiki/PSC-Meetings As with last month, we'll meet on Libera Chat here: https://web.libera.chat/?channels=#geomoose The Matrix/Element/FluffyChat option also works via matrix.osgeo.org on Matrix Channel #geomoose:osgeo.org Chat with you all on Friday! best, Tanya -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eadam at co.lincoln.or.us Tue Aug 18 13:47:29 2026 From: eadam at co.lincoln.or.us (Eli Adam) Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2026 20:47:29 +0000 Subject: [geomoose-psc] PSC Meeting Friday August 21st, 2026 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Updated agenda url. Eli ________________________________ From: geomoose-psc on behalf of TC Haddad via geomoose-psc Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2026 12:30 PM To: GeoMOOSE PSC Subject: [geomoose-psc] PSC Meeting Friday August 21st, 2026 Happy August GeoMoosers, Hope your summers have been going well! We have a PSC meeting on Friday August 21, 2025 3:00PM Atlantic / 2:00PM Eastern / 1:00PM Central / Noon Mountain / 11:00AM Pacific For the agenda, we'll pick up the conversation from last month and also follow up on the open PRs. In addition, we should probably discuss if we will have a 2026 Sprint (or not), and if yes, what those Sprint options might be. Minutes from last month are here: https://github.com/geomoose/geomoose/wiki/PSC-meeting-2026-07-17 Stub for this month's meeting is here (feel free to edit): https://github.com/geomoose/geomoose/wiki/PSC-Meeting-2025-08-21 https://github.com/geomoose/geomoose/wiki/PSC-meeting-2026-08-21 (Other agenda items welcome!) Minutes from all meetings can be found here: https://github.com/geomoose/geomoose/wiki/PSC-Meetings As with last month, we'll meet on Libera Chat here: https://web.libera.chat/?channels=#geomoose The Matrix/Element/FluffyChat option also works via matrix.osgeo.org on Matrix Channel #geomoose:osgeo.org Chat with you all on Friday! best, Tanya -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From theduckylittle at gmail.com Tue Aug 18 14:39:03 2026 From: theduckylittle at gmail.com (Dan Little) Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2026 16:39:03 -0500 Subject: [geomoose-psc] PSC Meeting Friday August 21st, 2026 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: This will be the wishy-washiest of responses to a PSC meeting: I'm like 50/50. I'll send a direct email to folks as to why shortly :-) I would love it if we could: A. Get a concrete to do list that closes out the GeoParquet work, or a vote to release the funds for that work. B. Any and all progress on other pull requests is really appreciated!!! Regarding a Fall Sprint, I could do one in the MSP area if folks were available but only 1-2 days. I think 3-4 would really push my availability. This will make sense shortly!! On Tue, Aug 18, 2026 at 3:47?PM Eli Adam via geomoose-psc < geomoose-psc at lists.osgeo.org> wrote: > Updated agenda url. > > Eli > > > ------------------------------ > *From:* geomoose-psc on behalf of > TC Haddad via geomoose-psc > *Sent:* Tuesday, August 18, 2026 12:30 PM > *To:* GeoMOOSE PSC > *Subject:* [geomoose-psc] PSC Meeting Friday August 21st, 2026 > > Happy August GeoMoosers, > > Hope your summers have been going well! > > We have a PSC meeting on Friday August 21, 2025 > 3:00PM Atlantic / 2:00PM Eastern / 1:00PM Central / Noon Mountain / > 11:00AM Pacific > > For the agenda, we'll pick up the conversation from last month and also > follow up on the open PRs. In addition, we should probably discuss if we > will have a 2026 Sprint (or not), and if yes, what those Sprint options > might be. > > Minutes from last month are here: > https://github.com/geomoose/geomoose/wiki/PSC-meeting-2026-07-17 > > Stub for this month's meeting is here (feel free to edit): > > > https://github.com/geomoose/geomoose/wiki/PSC-Meeting-2025-08-21 > https://github.com/geomoose/geomoose/wiki/PSC-meeting-2026-08-21 > > (Other agenda items welcome!) > > Minutes from all meetings can be found here: > https://github.com/geomoose/geomoose/wiki/PSC-Meetings > > As with last month, we'll meet on Libera Chat here: > https://web.libera.chat/?channels=#geomoose > > The Matrix/Element/FluffyChat option also works via matrix.osgeo.org on > Matrix Channel #geomoose:osgeo.org > > Chat with you all on Friday! > > best, > Tanya > _______________________________________________ > geomoose-psc mailing list > geomoose-psc at lists.osgeo.org > https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geomoose-psc > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eadam at co.lincoln.or.us Tue Aug 18 15:00:54 2026 From: eadam at co.lincoln.or.us (Eli Adam) Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2026 22:00:54 +0000 Subject: [geomoose-psc] GeoMoose GeoParquet Support In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Dan and all, Looping back on this, it looks like these items have been completed. Please submit an invoice for payment not exceeding $2,000. I've also put this on the PSC agenda to review processing invoices. Best regards, Eli ________________________________ From: geomoose-psc on behalf of Eli Adam via geomoose-psc Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2026 1:33 PM To: GeoMOOSE PSC ; Dan Little Subject: Re: [geomoose-psc] GeoMoose GeoParquet Support Hi Dan, This is exciting development! As people test it out, we'll learn more about how it is working. >From a bookkeeping perspective, look back to the initial scope (https://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/geomoose-psc/attachments/20260119/a519ae6e/attachment.md) and once complete, submit an invoice for processing by the PSC. I haven't tested GeoParquet yet but a quick look (that may have missed things) suggests that "1. Host a version of the demonstration parcel dataset in GeoParquet format on GitHub" may be met with an equivalent public google bucket. I don't see that 2. has been completed, "2. Publish the instructions for how the conversion from the parcel shapefile was performed. This should appear as a How To in the documentation repository." Again, I only took a glance and may have missed things. Thanks for the exciting improvement! Best regards, Eli ________________________________ From: geomoose-psc on behalf of Dan Little via geomoose-psc Sent: Monday, April 13, 2026 10:18 AM To: GeoMOOSE PSC Subject: [geomoose-psc] GeoMoose GeoParquet Support Hi Folks! I wanted to get an update on the GeoParquet in GeoMoose support out to the PSC. The original proposal had us concluding this at the end of March. 95% of the code was done then but I had an itch I wanted to scratch -- adding WebWorker support for GeoParquet layers. The WebWorker support allows Parquet files to be loaded without over-burdening the main rendering thread for the application. The current code is available here: - https://github.com/geomoose/gm3/pull/938 I used DuckDB to convert the GeoJSON version of the Parcels to GeoParquet, put the output in a public google bucket, and then continued to Dev. I also keep a copy locally for when working from planes. :-) This should all work seamlessly with the current demo. At this point, I would consider this the conclusion of the scope of work (and a little more got done as well) but would love bug reports and feedback! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: