[MapProxy-dev] MapProxy PSC, RFCs and GitHub PR

[Tom Kralidis]

Hi Oliver: thanks very much for moving this forward.  Our organization
(Meteorological Service
of Canada) uses MapProxy in production for national applications,
providing accelerated maps
of our real-time WMS of radar and numerical weather prediction data.

We recently funded the WMS Dimension caching work [1], and I'm
interested in seeing MapProxy
sustained over the very long term with PSC governance and continued
active/healthy participation
and contributions.

Note I am also interested on future development regarding the evolving
OGC API efforts regarding
Maps and Tiles, and integration with other geopython projects such as pygeoapi.

Cheers

..Tom

[1] https://github.com/mapproxy/mapproxy/pull/449

On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 8:16 AM Oliver Tonnhofer <olt at omniscale.de> wrote:
>
> Hi everyone,
>
> sorry for the slow progress on the PSC.
>
> I'm happy that we now have a list of seven candidates for the PSC. All of you are long time users of MapProxy and most of you also contributed in the past. So far we have:
>
> Denis Rykov
> Johannes Weskamm
> Just van den Broecke
> Matt Walker
> Oliver Tonnhofer
> Ramūnas Dronga
> Tom Kralidis
>
> Maybe you can all introduce yourself with 2-3 sentences on how you are using MapProxy, your affiliation with a company that uses MapProxy, do you have any plans within your PSC membership?
>
>
> Next step is, that we all agree on the PSC guidelines. Please take a look at https://github.com/mapproxy/mapproxy/wiki/PSC-Guidelines which is more a less a copy of the guidelines from MapServer, OpenLayers and PyGeoAPI.
> Make sure you all understood the responsibilities: https://github.com/mapproxy/mapproxy/wiki/PSC-Guidelines#membership-responsibilities
>
> The only major change is that I increased the review period from two days to five business days. I think two days is quite short. (Minor changes aren't affected by the voting process anyways and a revert is just one command away.)
>
> I'm also not sure how we should handle GitHub issues & pull requests? Do we want to keep all discussion on this list? Do we want an RFC for each PR? Would be it be OK if the PR is the RFC and we only vote on the mailing list? Should we just add a PR template [0] and mention that they should write to the mailing list if they want to bring this PR forward? (Otherwise they would need to wait till one of us is enough interested in the PR to make an RFC on their own.)
>
> I'm quite open to all of these options.
>
> [0] https://help.github.com/en/github/building-a-strong-community/creating-a-pull-request-template-for-your-repository
>
>
> Regards,
> Oliver
>
> --
> Oliver Tonnhofer  | Omniscale GmbH & Co KG  | https://omniscale.com
> OpenStreetMap WMS and tile services         | https://maps.omniscale.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> MapProxy-dev mailing list
> MapProxy-dev at lists.osgeo.org
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapproxy-dev