[Geomoose-users] Recommended MS4W/GeoMoose version?

[Dan Little]

Jim and I are working on a plan for a 2.4.1 release.  The main.js fix and the MS6.0.1 fixes.  We're working on scheduling more than anything else.



>________________________________
> From: Bob Basques <Bob.Basques at ci.stpaul.mn.us>
>To: Eli Adam <eadam at co.lincoln.or.us>; Jim Klassen <klassen.js at gmail.com> 
>Cc: "geomoose-users at lists.osgeo.org" <geomoose-users at lists.osgeo.org> 
>Sent: Wednesday, November 23, 2011 9:09 AM
>Subject: Re: [Geomoose-users] Recommended MS4W/GeoMoose version?
> 
>
>All, 
>
>Related to these types of fixes.  Would it be wise to in general,  to always have at least two stable versions of major releases in maintenance mode.  Once a new major version comes out, the oldest in the history goes into non-auto upgrade/fix status.  This wouldn't need to preclude some person / organization from enhancing an older version if they chose to pay for it. 
>
>
>bobb 
>
>
>
>
>>>> Jim Klassen <klassen.js at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>I think a 2.4.1 with the main.js:501 comma fix and the MS 6 fixes would be a good plan.  Even after 2.6 some people may want to continue to run a 2.4 series.
>
>On Nov 22, 2011, at 15:15, Eli Adam <eadam at co.lincoln.or.us> wrote:
>
>> Until we get the next release (2.6) out, do we have a recommended MS4W
>> and GeoMoose version combination?
>>
>> Although I've only done limited testing, it seems that the most recent
>> MS4W (3.0.3) with GeoMoose 2.4 with a few changes is the best bet.
>>
>> The changes needed to GeoMoose 2.4 that I have noted so far are:
>>
>> -PHP: layerObj->getFeature() is gone, use layerObj->getShape() instead.
>> -geomoose_globals.map: GD/JPEG driver is gone, use AGG/JPEG.
>>                      Default to PNG not GIF.
>> -symbol.sym: Comment out GAP and STYLE as they have moved into the STYLE
>>            stanza in the mapfile from the SYMBOL definition.
>> (All done in trunk with revision 468)
>> -And the trailing commas in main.js (501) and compiled.js (2216)
>>
>> Other changes?
>>
>> Should we consider a 2.4.1 release with these changes or just focus on 2.6?
>>
>> Bests, Eli
>> _______________________________________________
>> Geomoose-users mailing list
>> Geomoose-users at lists.osgeo.org
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geomoose-users
>_______________________________________________
>Geomoose-users mailing list
>Geomoose-users at lists.osgeo.org
>http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geomoose-users
> 
>_______________________________________________
>Geomoose-users mailing list
>Geomoose-users at lists.osgeo.org
>http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geomoose-users
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/geomoose-users/attachments/20111129/e5dc231e/attachment.html