[postgis-devel] 2.1 beta status Vote: +1

[Paragon Corporation]

On Wed, 2013-05-01 at 18:03 -0400, Paragon Corporation wrote:

>> I'd love to.  Does it require it to be feature complete though or does 
>> it not have to be feature complete for beta?
>>   I think we are more or less feature complete at this point. 

> Well, a beta usually means feature complete, so...

Devrim,

Strk and I are on board.  Paul I think is traveling so hasn't given his two
cents.
Mark is probably on holiday.

That said.  I've pushed all outstanding stuff to 2.2 that I don't think has
a chance in hell of making 2.1
in next week and I don't see evidence that it is actively being worked on .
I suspect we'll be a tad bit later than 9.3beta1, but shooting for next week
to close out the final things.

Olivier is going to work on getting his cgal configure stuff in place this
weekend. This will change more how you compile than anything and won't
change your compiling unless you are building with the optional 3D stuff.
So again I think this can slide past beta release if needed.

And I've committed all outstanding patches or pushing them forward if I
thought they were not good enough.

What we are left with that aren't enhancements are listed here:

http://trac.osgeo.org/postgis/query?status=assigned&status=new&status=reopen
ed&order=priority&col=id&col=summary&col=milestone&col=status&col=type&col=p
riority&col=component&milestone=PostGIS+2.1.0&type=enhancement&type=patch


The PAGC one I'm working on and is actually in place (just working out some
kinks) but is really an extra (not part of core PostGIS).  ST_ColorMap I
really want to see in 2.1  so am willing to bend the rules if we are okay
with a beta release not having it. Besides Bborie is always fast about
jumping on things so he might surprise me and get it in next week.

Rest of stuff not listed are bug fixes that are truly bugs and won't change
the user facing API so don't think are necessary for a beta release.


Thanks,
Regina
http://www.postgis.us
http://postgis.net