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

[Matt Walker]

Hi all,

I've been using and making small contributions to MapProxy for almost
10 years now.

At Astun Technology we use MapProxy to provide national tile and WMS
services mainly serving Ordnance Survey GB data to thousands of users. We
also regularly use MapProxy in client projects either directly
or indirectly (dynamic tile cache during dev/ static cache in production).

Along with some minor bug fixes I've been involved in implementing the
decorate image API to allow response images to be updated on the fly and I
made a start on the S3 backend :-)

Huge thank you to Oliver and the team at Omniscale for their considerable
effort over the years.

I'm looking forward to seeing MapProxy continue to evolve.

Kind regards,

Matt.



On Wed, 13 May 2020, 13:16 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
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/mapproxy-dev/attachments/20200519/5abfc49d/attachment.html>