[postgis-devel] Tickets

[Kevin Neufeld]

I totally hear you and agree with you Paul.  There probably is some threshold where old tickets should get closed due to 
lack of interest.  If the product has gotten by fine so far, a few unimplemented enhancements that hasn't escalated to 
critical, is not going to be missed.

Sadly, this is the unfortunate reality of open source development - the coding usually falls to those that actually get 
paid to do the work, or who have enough spare time to give some of it back to the community.

-- Kevin

Paul Ramsey wrote:
> Trying to clean down the tickets so we can get to a release state for
> 1.4.1 and 1.5.0 I'm struck my how many I'm just going to have to push
> out to the next version. And the next. And the next.
> 
> There is a category of things that are "nice to have" that everyone
> agrees are "nice to have" but yet never rise to the threshold of
> someone actually *doing* them, and that list of things only grows and
> grows and grows.
> 
> Kevins PIP enhancement http://trac.osgeo.org/postgis/ticket/75
> Support for anonymous geometry collections in predicates
> http://trac.osgeo.org/postgis/ticket/256
> 
> Both of these I examined and thought about the amount of new code and
> code complexity cost was involved versus the amount of new
> functionality, and put them aside again. And I'm the one most able to
> do those tickets, in terms of experience with those bits. So are they
> going to get done? Do we have the bloody-mindedness to drown the
> kittens we don't want to keep?
> 
> I don't want to end up like Mapserver, with several hundred unclosed
> tickets, being punted along year after year. I think if an enhancement
> doesn't get done in two years, it should be closed out. There's a
> threshold for defects probably too, though much higher.
> 
> P.
> _______________________________________________
> postgis-devel mailing list
> postgis-devel at postgis.refractions.net
> http://postgis.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/postgis-devel