[Geomoose-users] GeoMoose organization
DEAN ANDERSON
ANDERSON.DEAN at co.polk.or.us
Fri Feb 25 15:06:47 EST 2011
Bob
No we were not putting stuff into the TRAC. I had assumed that this would be something Houston would do. Kind of gets back to the fact that we need a more formal process for management.
We are in the process of creating a "completed" list. Some of the projects migrated a bit from inception or proved too costly to complete. Part of this will be to identify what has been placed into core (like bug fixes) and what is in enhancements.
Take care,
Dean
>>> "Bob Basques" 02/25/11 11:00 AM >>>
Dean,
Oh, you meant "the" wiki. I haven't put much time into it either myself.
I see the community portal link from the main page any everything. Good seeing this kind of thing posted to the working site too.
Qusetion, is there a way to mark which are completed and which are still open for enhancements that a re listed? Does this make more sense to add into TRAC in the future.
bobb
>>> "DEAN ANDERSON" wrote:
Bob
After the WIKI was setup we put our project stuff on the GeoMoose Wiki Community Portal. We elected not to separate ourselves from the GeoMoose site and have a separate effort and/or site as we want our efforts to mesh with the rest of the GeoMoose users as much as possible.
http://www.geomoose.org/wiki/index.php/Oregon_County_Consortium
The WIKI contains that last two projects and outlines planned projects for this spring/summer. We use the WIKI to collect input, document requirements, and help prioritize projects. This information is then used to work with Houston to develop a project spec. As part of the last project spec Houston will post enhancements, etc.. on the WIKI so our members have an easy way to download enhancements and others can see them. My hope is that other groups will take advantage of the community portal and put their project info there.
Our group is pretty loose and informal. We get together about every 6+ weeks to...
1. Review web sites and interfaces and help each other to support our common Oregon customers (the public).
2. Share results from existing projects.
3. Share tips and tricks.
4. Identify and prioritize projects for future development.
5. Get web based training when we need it.
6. Share funds in getting projects done.
We will have a couple of more members go live in the coming month or so. My hope is that they will post a link to their site on the gallery page. Also, now that we can post documents to the WIKI we will put some of our historical information there so I don't have to e-mail it out. It is a cool process. I wish I had more time to spend on it but as an IT guy I have other commitments.
I will be submitting a paper to FOSS4G to describe our implementation process including use cases. We will also have a session to discuss this at the GIS-In-Action conference in Portland Oregon next month.
Dean
>>> "Bob Basques" 02/25/11 9:14 AM >>>
Dean,
I think having a permanent or semi-permanent support structure in place will only help and improve the implementors experience which should translate to a better end user experience. This has been an identified need for quite a while within the group here. No lack of support for setting up a more formalized support structure, it's just been more fun to develop. The trick is putting it together in a way that doesn't impede the development process, while still providing the resources needed for the process. I think a sheperding approach would be the least invasive to the process. It can also accommodate representatives from different interested parties to decide priorities as well future capabilities and options for improvements.
Your idea of a test project is a very good one. This could be used to shake out the bugs, so to speak, related to getting a group of interested folks together and defining how support structure might be set up to greatest effect. This would be a very good presentational piece for Denver as well, even if the project couldn't be completed before then. Just relating the process I think would be of interest to others in the community.
Do you have a direct link to the consortium website?
bobb
>>> "DEAN ANDERSON" wrote:
Bob
It appears you are going to be at FOSSG, perhaps that would be a good place to talk about this some evening. The Oregon Consortium would like to help in this process along and we do have a limited amount of funds to contribute. We identified some of the same issues as a priority for us at our last Oregon consortium meeting. If folks would like to do this sooner perhaps we could arrange something. Perhaps we could do a project this summer and then review the results as a group this September. Our project lists are documented on the Wiki in the community pages section.
We have made great progress to date in Oregon with GeoMoose to date and would like to see the program continue to mature.
Dean Anderson
IT Director
Polk County
>>> "Bob Basques" 02/25/11 8:04 AM >>>
Christopher,
There are a few commercial and non-profit vendors available now that have done quite a bit of work in the setup, development and research related to GeoMoose and it's continued development, and this type of support has progressed the project very nicely to date. Having said that I'm also aware of the need to setup some dedicated support functions along the lines of bug fixes, continued development and research into additional capabilities as well as integration with other Opensource as well as proprietary GIS services and systems. These GeoMoose savvy groups also have some additional ideas and capabilities already in the hopper related to improvements. They are also very interested in hearing from people and groups such as yourself with respect to desired capabilities of the package. I would be interested in your specification (or capabilities) wish list for example, regardless, purely for planning purposes.
My thoughts in recent months have been in setting up some sort of shepherding arrangement with the core developer group, that can handle a supporting roll in the GeoMoose development process. Such entities already exist, either as commercial and/or non-profits, and are interested in this type of work arrangement. To date there hasn't been a single large enough project or group of smaller projects with similar enough interests to successfully sponsor the type of support structure you are describing.
I'm prepared to attempt the arrangement of such a framework with the core development group once a seeding sponsor or sponsors (such as yourself) have been identified as being interested in pursuing such an arrangement.
Please pass on your desired needs list and if you are interested in discussing further, we can keep this thread going or go offline as well.
Thanks
bobb
Bob Basques
GIS Systems Developer
City of Saint Paul, MN.
612.598.9210
http://gis.ci.stpaul.mn.us
>>> "Kroot, Christopher" wrote:
Hello all
My name is Christopher Kroot and I am the enterprise GIS analyst for the State of Maine Office of GIS. We are currently using mapserver to create WMS for imagery. We have developed a simple front end application built with java script and php with mapserver as the backend. We have determine that others have progressed much further down this road then we have and are looking at selecting a code base for our current and future development.
We are considering using GeoMoose as the code base for our enterprise web mapping applications that have a mapserver backend. Currently we have 5 stakeholder groups who have provided us with the functionally requirements for their web mapping needs. My review of the Clatsop County Web Maps http://maps.co.clatsop.or.us/applications/index.html# is promising, as it contains most of the base functionality required. We will be investing a significant amount of resource in the coming years into the environment we choose and want to select the best one to start with.
What is the organizational structure for GeoMoose? Are their funded positions for maintenance and future development?
We are using the ESRI ArcServer environment for web mapping that requires complex spatial analysis, geoprocessing, other more complex functional requirements.
Thank you for your assistance and have a good day
Christopher Kroot
Enterprise GIS Analyst
Maine Office of GIS
SHS 174
264 Civic Center Drive
Augusta ME 04333-0174
christopher.kroot at maine.gov
207-592-0162
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/geomoose-users/attachments/20110225/fac6b4bf/attachment.html
More information about the Geomoose-users
mailing list