5.0 Release Plan

[Daniel Morissette]

I agree that some of this would warrant a 5.0 release, but I think we 
should really get a release out soon with what's been implemented 
already (can we still do it by September?) to follow the 6 months 
release cycle that users are expecting.

It doesn't matter much to me whether we call it 4.10 or 5.0, we don't 
have any architectural changes that would really warrant a 5.0 but we 
may have enough key features for a 5.0 already with the antialiasing and 
curved labels (Those features have been sitting in the dev version for 
almost 6 months and still haven't been released.)

I'm also in for an IRC meeting to discuss the release plan ASAP... tonight?

Daniel



Steve Lime wrote:
> Hi all: I'm wondering if it might make sense to start talking about a
> 5.0 release plan? It would be nice to at least have a good idea of what
> will be included before the conference in Sept so that we can discuss
> with users etc... There are several RFCs out there with an unknown
> status (e.g. dynamic array allocation, C unit tests) and a few other
> things (e.g. internationalization) that are still hanging.
> 
> Personally I have 3 big todo's:
> 
> 1) RFC 19 (attribute binding)
> 2) style-level transparency/removing TRANSPARENCY ALPHA (if possible)
> 3) WFS application schema support
> 
> Along with other cleanup...
> 
> Those along with the WXS services support, curved labels, full-GEOS
> support, mapfile includes, credential encryption and other stuff should
> be more than enough to warrant a 5.0 release. I'd love to get a second
> renderer in place but I fear there isn't time.
> 
> Thoughts? 
> 
> Steve
> 
> Also, what do folks think about periodic IRC developer meetings?
> MapBuilder does this, seems to work pretty well in keeping out in front
> of things.
> 
> Stephen Lime
> Data & Applications Manager
> 
> Minnesota DNR
> 500 Lafayette Road
> St. Paul, MN 55155
> 651-259-5473
> 


-- 
Daniel Morissette
http://www.mapgears.com/