[OpenLayers-Dev] 2.7 ticket list

[Stephen Woodbridge]

Chris,

I sympathize with your sentiment that tile.php and precache.php not 
being part of OpenLayers, but I think it is very useful to have them 
with the examples, for a couple of reasons.

1) it keeps a version that we know works because it has been tested, 
with the code
2) it makes it easy for people to find these as they may not have come 
from the ka-map project but might still want to use the,

May we should have a contrib directory that these could go into.

Just a thought, whatever you decide will work.

-Steve W

Christopher Schmidt wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 27, 2008 at 10:48:39AM -0300, Pedro Simonetti Garcia wrote:
>> Hi Christopher,
>>
>> I'm new to OL community, so I don't know all the internal
>> proceedings / rules to report bugs, write tickets, and so on.
>> So, forgive me if I skip some steps.
>>
>> I wrote the tickets #327 e #1519 of this list.
>>
>> http://trac.openlayers.org/ticket/327
> 
> Right, I need to respond to this one, as the de facto maintainer of the
> ka-Map integration with OpenLayers. What it comes down to, breifly, is
> that I believe the fixes you have described should be happening
> upstream, with the ka-Map project, and that instead of having tile.php
> in the OpenLayers examples, we should simply remove it totally.
> Similarly, 1518 below: the precache.php.txt file does not belong in
> OpenLayers, but I don't see anything particularly wrong with the
> KaMapCache layer, if you're interested in it.
> 
>> http://trac.openlayers.org/ticket/1519
> 
> This is simple, and I just haven't learned enough about translations to
> test them yet, so I haven't done anything with it. It looksfine in
> general.
> 
>> I also wrote a comment on issue #1108, which is related to
>> the #864 that is flagged to 2.7 milestone.
>>
>> http://trac.openlayers.org/ticket/1108
>> http://trac.openlayers.org/ticket/864
>>
>> I'm also the author of the #1518, which is related to the #1519:
>>
>> And I wish to help with this issues, but I'm not sure
>> exactly how to proceed. I reported those tickets using a
>> anonymous username/pass. Should I create a account
>> and post a comment in those tickets to make easier future
>> discussions about them?
> 
> That would be good, yeah.
> 
> Your patches, in general, look fine, and I'm glad to know you're still
> aware of them and looking to push them forward. So long as that's the
> case, there's no problem leaving them in the current milestone. I'm
> mosty looking to push a lot of things that people have opened and
> forgotten about forward, if there is no active work on them.
> 
> Any further comments on your tickets, I'll do through trac/seperate
> maisl to the list: thanks for the summary, and the hard work!
> 
>> If you are interested in my help, please let me know.
>>
>> my best regards,
>>
>> Pedro Simonetti.
>>
>> 2008/4/27 Christopher Schmidt <crschmidt at metacarta.com>:
>>
>>> The 2.7 ticket list is a mess. I'd like to put some effort into cleaning
>>> it up, but to be honest, it's a bit of a big job for me alone.
>>>
>>>
>>> http://trac.openlayers.org/query?status=new&status=assigned&status=reopened&group=type&milestone=2.7+Release
>>>
>>> We have 105 tickets in this release.
>>>
>>> Although some metadata is wrong:
>>>  * 38 are bugs
>>>  * 57 are features
>>>  * 10 are tasks
>>>
>>> Some of these have active work being done on them. Some of them just
>>> need a thorough review. Some of them are probably not being actively
>>> worked on, or are just an idea.
>>>
>>> I think that if there is a ticket here that you consider yourself
>>> 'owner' of -- for example, if you reported it -- and you are no longer
>>> actively working on this ticket, that you move it to a different
>>> milestone than the 2.7 milestone. There is one for 2.8 -- if you're not
>>> currently working on it, but you still intend to at some near-future
>>> point, that might be a good place to put it. If you don't intend to get
>>> back to it, but you're still interested in the functionality, please
>>> feel free to toss it to the "Future" milestone. Note that this is all
>>> just my opinion, since we don't have any strong rules on this... would
>>> love to hear others opinions.
>>>
>>> I don't think we have any specific plans for 2.7 at this point, but I'd
>>> personally like to keep our releases a bit more release-early
>>> release-often than 2.6 ended up being, and the current 100+ tickets that
>>> are open is just a bit overwhelming for me...
>>>
>>> Looking forward to hearing/seeing more discussion.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> --
>>> Christopher Schmidt
>>> MetaCarta
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Dev mailing list
>>> Dev at openlayers.org
>>> http://openlayers.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
>>>
>