[mapserver-dev] Expanding the MapServer Project

[Stephen Woodbridge]

Hi Jeff,

While I can not speak to the technical aspects of this, and this is 
probably a good discussion to have at some point, I thought that these 
type of decisions and discussion would happen under the mapserver PSC 
governance on how to move these projects forward after we decided to 
merge these projects.

Would you see lack of OGR support as a show stopper for merging the 
projects? Why?

Or are you just thinking about the next steps and starting a discussion 
on what we do next?

Thanks,
   -Steve W

On 3/25/2011 9:06 AM, Jeff McKenna wrote:
> Before we move forward with this I'd like to hear the comments from all
> of the PSC regarding TinyOWS and its database support (as far as I know
> it still only supports PostGIS connections). Is there a plan for TinyOWS
> to leverage OGR to connect to supported databases? For example, the ZOO
> project uses OGR to connect to any OGR-supported database for MapServer
> WFS-T connections (if you don't believe me, check it out yourself:
> http://zoo-project.org/site/ZooWebSite/Demo/WFS-T)
>
> If MapServer adopts TinyOWS, am I correct to assume that OGR would be
> leveraged for WFS-T connections?
>
> -jeff
>
>
>
> On 11-03-24 1:47 PM, Lime, Steve D (DNR) wrote:
>> Hi All: Wanted to drop folks a note about a topic that came up over
>> beers in Montreal. It has to do with expanding the core functionality
>> the “project” can deliver by bring a few select external projects in
>> under the MapServer umbrella. The two we were thinking about initially
>> are mod_geocache (for tiling support) and TinyOWS (for basic WFS-T).
>> Why? Well, beyond the technical connections to MapServer there are
>> several reasons.
>>
>> For MapServer users this would provide a more complete set of
>> functionality on the server-side than is currently available. Instead of
>> sending folks to an tilecache or whatever for tiling, and GeoServer for
>> WFS-T we could provide much of that functionality as part of the core.
>> That’s not to say that folks couldn’t or wouldn’t want to use the
>> external solutions but in many cases we could deliver a complete
>> solution.
>>
>> For these external projects moving into MapServer provides a home. Both
>> of the projects mentioned are relatively small and MapServer would help
>> establish a user base for them and hopefully increase their level of
>> adoption. I think it could also attract new developers, at the very
>> least those with commit rights for MapServer. This will also promote (or
>> perhaps even force) tighter integration with MapServer core. An initial
>> idea is pulling mapfile handling out into a libmapfile that could be
>> used and maintained cooperatively.
>>
>> Bringing projects into MapServer is not a trivial activity and would
>> take some time. We’re thinking it would involve tasks such as:
>>
>> - Vetting source and licensing of incoming projects (e.g. akin to OSGEO
>> incubation)
>>
>> - Source, testing and build environment restructuring
>>
>> - Integration/migration of svn and trac (or the like) environments
>>
>> - Integration/migration of websites and documentation
>>
>> Finally, the MapServer PSC would become the governing organization for
>> these new pieces. As a result, it would make sense to add the project
>> leads for each project to the PSC (Thomas Bonfort (mod_geocache) is
>> already a member).
>>
>> This is the first significant project restructuring for MapServer, but I
>> think it makes sense and positions MapServer as more than just a map
>> maker. Thoughts?
>>
>> Steve
>>
>> (Note: I shared this privately with the MapServer PSC to gauge interest
>> and was encouraged to bring it to the –dev list…)
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> mapserver-dev mailing list
> mapserver-dev at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapserver-dev