Unterhaltung mit #deegree
(14:24:16) Das Thema für #deegree ist: Welcome to deegree, an OSGeo project. Visit the main project page at http://deegree.org and our wiki at http://wiki.deegree.org with lots of extra info. Check out a running system at http://demo.deegree.org and follow us on twitter @deegree_org.
(14:24:45) ndrs1 [~stranger@p578bff50.dip0.t-ipconnect.de] hat den Raum betreten.
(14:26:20) jwilden [~wilden@static-87-79-89-38.netcologne.de] hat den Raum betreten.
(14:30:52) tf_ [5512f152@gateway/web/freenode/ip.85.18.241.82] hat den Raum betreten.
(14:30:58) markusschneider: hi everybody!
(14:31:02) markusschneider: shall we begin?
(14:31:06) copierrj: hi
(14:31:10) jwilden: Hello :)
(14:31:11) ndrs1: hi
(14:31:16) tf_ heißt jetzt Guest74210
(14:31:25) Modus (+o ndrs1) von ChanServ
(14:31:51) markusschneider: meeting page: http://wiki.deegree.org/deegreeWiki/TmcMeeting/TmcMeeting20121030
(14:33:31) Guest74210 hat den Raum verlassen.
(14:33:33) markusschneider: please reload the wiki page
(14:33:46) markusschneider: :-)
(14:33:58) markusschneider: anything to add to the agenda?
(14:34:16) copierrj: nope
(14:34:35) markusschneider: ok, let's start with the deegree community space actions then, shall we?
(14:34:46) torfri [5512f152@gateway/web/freenode/ip.85.18.241.82] hat den Raum betreten.
(14:34:49) markusschneider: what's left to do for us?
(14:35:04) markusschneider: are there any subjects that the TMC should bring up as discussions slots?
(14:35:18) markusschneider: Current list: http://wiki.deegree.org/deegreeWiki/deegreeCommunitySpace2012Planning
(14:35:45) markusschneider: TMC discussions: deegree web services handbook/ deegree project infrastructure
(14:36:42) markusschneider: what about the stability manifesto?
(14:36:49) markusschneider: shall we discuss and finish that?
(14:36:53) ndrs1: sounds good
(14:36:58) copierrj: ok
(14:37:08) markusschneider: btw, any feedback from you so far?
(14:37:12) markusschneider: http://wiki.deegree.org/deegreeWiki/deegree3/StabilityManifestoDraft
(14:38:07) copierrj: looks great
(14:38:30) markusschneider: ok, i can suggest it as a potential discussion slot...
(14:38:38) ndrs1: +1
(14:38:42) copierrj: btw: is version 3.2 going to be the last 3.x version?
(14:38:52) markusschneider: i would prefer that!
(14:38:59) ndrs1: agreed
(14:39:25) copierrj: +1 (a stable api would be very nice)
(14:39:52) torfri: Why is a stable API and configuration forseen for release 4.x and not for 3.x?
(14:40:11) ndrs1: because we already changed it a lot within the 3.x series
(14:40:28) markusschneider: I tried to make that clear in the text...
(14:40:58) markusschneider: keeping the API stable is very hard when fundamental concepts are still evolving...
(14:41:45) markusschneider: so, we decided (between 3.0 and 3.1) that we won't do it...
(14:42:24) copierrj: are we going to support a certain stable api indefinitely?
(14:42:27) markusschneider: but i absolutely understand that we need to get there
(14:42:48) ndrs1: copierrj: well, only within major versions
(14:42:57) torfri: do we have documented which fundamental concepts are still evolving?
(14:43:17) ndrs1: torfri: yes, we have a flag on stability within each pom
(14:44:08) copierrj: maybe we could start tagging specific Java interfaces as stable?
(14:44:08) torfri: ok, then we can say only a few components are instable. Others are stable and thus API and config are fix?
(14:44:18) markusschneider: imho, the most important once are layer/themes configuration and the whole approach to mapping (complex) features
(14:44:57) markusschneider: well, the config is stable, the API is not.
(14:45:12) markusschneider: actually, we didn't yet define, what the API actually is.
(14:45:21) markusschneider: Is it every public type/method?
(14:45:22) copierrj: It is imho not a good idea to consider every public Java class/method to be part of a stable API
(14:45:38) copierrj: It is going to be very hard to maintain such api
(14:45:52) ndrs1: let me note that APIs may also get changed if the checkstyle metrics are consequently considered
(14:46:11) ndrs1: once you have reduced complexity a big deal, you can probably better define a stable API
(14:46:28) ndrs1: unfortunately, nobody answered my call for comments on this topic
(14:46:56) torfri: then let's introduce a new abstraction layer as a facade to the core services of deegree
(14:47:05) ndrs1: ??
(14:47:09) copierrj: why?
(14:47:13) ndrs1: how do you want to do that?
(14:47:42) markusschneider: you mean such as geoapi?
(14:47:52) markusschneider: http://www.geoapi.org/
(14:48:05) torfri: introducing well-defined interfaces as we have seen in many other APIs such as Java EE or other OSS Java frameworks
(14:48:28) markusschneider: i guess we all share love for well-defined interfaces...
(14:48:39) ndrs1: and we already have well defined interfaces
(14:48:50) ndrs1: they're just evolving as we actually write the implementation
(14:49:00) markusschneider: and this is where we should get with 4.0, imho
(14:49:21) markusschneider: but in the past, it would have been to much of a burden. really.
(14:49:34) torfri: this interfaces provides access to the core functionality of the deegree services which includes concepts such as the deegree workspace, an API to access, configure services, datasources, provides and so on
(14:50:05) torfri: the current public interfaces and classes I woudn't expose to the public.
(14:50:13) markusschneider: agreed. but can we do that for 3.2?
(14:50:23) torfri: since as you pointed out there are subject of change in the futzere
(14:51:01) copierrj: adding more abstraction than necessary is dangerous imho
(14:51:08) torfri: why not start with one interface for the deegree workspace as a start?
(14:51:30) ndrs1: there are already many interfaces around the deegree workspace concept
(14:51:42) ndrs1: adding one for the workspace class itself won't solve anything
(14:52:01) markusschneider: i would like to see some cleanup and discussion on that...
(14:52:10) torfri: then let's make them stable and define these interfaces as THE interface for the deegree workspace
(14:52:25) ndrs1: yes, feel free to also have a look at my resourcedeps branch in svn for better workspace interfaces
(14:52:46) markusschneider: again: does this really make sense for 3.2?
(14:53:02) ndrs1: I agree it should be a goal for 4.0
(14:53:27) copierrj: maybe we could discuss interface design criteria during the deegree community space ?
(14:54:18) markusschneider: good point. shall we continue the discussion then?
(14:54:25) copierrj: by all means
(14:54:25) ndrs1: +1
(14:54:28) markusschneider: +1
(14:54:47) markusschneider: and feel free to answer to my mailing list post on the same matter, btw
(14:54:58) jwilden: +1
(14:55:05) torfri: to postpone this decision will cause a significant impact on every deegree installation since there will be no migration strategy from 3.x to 4.x. This happened already for 2.x to 3.x.
(14:55:26) torfri: At least the config should be stable.
(14:55:32) torfri: API could come later
(14:55:42) markusschneider: +1
(14:55:46) copierrj: +1
(14:55:50) ndrs1: +1
(14:55:56) markusschneider: but what about the config exceptions?
(14:56:02) markusschneider: they already happened...
(14:56:27) copierrj: we might be able to fix those using e.g. xslt...
(14:56:55) markusschneider: sure, we may have compatibility layers. but who's going to write them?
(14:57:47) ndrs1: that's what I thought :-)
(14:58:26) markusschneider: torsten, what do you mean by "since there will be no migration strategy from 3.x to 4.x."
(14:59:20) markusschneider: I think we're currently discussing 3.x minor version compatibility, right?
(14:59:21) ndrs1: keep in mind the main difference that 4.x is not going to be a rewrite of 3.x (as 3.x was of 2.x)
(14:59:50) torfri: with deegree 3.x there was no tool or something to migrate a configration based on deegree 2 to deegree 3
(15:00:16) ndrs1: please also keep in mind that we don't have the manpower of SpringSource or Sun
(15:00:39) torfri: to postpone a decision to freeze the configuration concepts for deegree 3.2 this could happen again when moving forward to deegree 4.x
(15:01:28) ndrs1: no it cannot, because the concepts will remain the same, unlike 2 -> 3
(15:01:51) markusschneider: but still it may be more effective to discuss this further in the community space. you think this will be a problem to wait until then?
(15:02:00) ndrs1: ok
(15:02:06) copierrj: +1
(15:02:35) torfri: no. let's move on
(15:02:59) markusschneider: i will add this as a discussion slot.
(15:03:39) markusschneider: any more actions for community space?
(15:04:21) copierrj: something related to the community space: the registration currently sends e-mails without subject
(15:04:28) markusschneider: Ok. Andreas, can you give a status update to the registration problems? we had that last week, right?
(15:04:38) markusschneider: copierrj: right
(15:04:48) markusschneider: who can fix that?
(15:04:58) markusschneider: i believe, only lat/lon can do so...
(15:05:12) markusschneider: same with the wiki registration problems.
(15:05:30) ndrs1: true. I added a ticket for Jeronimo, I think there was no answer yet
(15:05:42) markusschneider: http://tracker.deegree.org/deegree-services/ticket/450
(15:06:19) markusschneider: can the lat/lon guys do anything about this?
(15:06:34) markusschneider: i believe we tried all available communication channels :-(
(15:06:41) jwilden: I can talk to him to do it as fast as possible
(15:06:44) ndrs1: we also have http://tracker.deegree.org/deegree-services/ticket/457
(15:06:58) ndrs1: the buildserver still has hard disk troubles and is unusable
(15:07:24) markusschneider: jwilden: thank you, that's most welcome
(15:07:54) markusschneider: Next: deegree webpage / latest release
(15:08:11) markusschneider: I found that the pre11 seems to be missing
(15:08:21) markusschneider: As is the latest documentation release.
(15:08:42) markusschneider: http://www.deegree.org/Download
(15:08:47) markusschneider: http://www.deegree.org/Documentation
(15:09:18) markusschneider: I would like to ask if we can define a clear responsibility here?
(15:09:26) ndrs1: +1
(15:09:40) copierrj: +1
(15:10:11) markusschneider: I believe only lat/lon employees have the chance to update the page at the moment, right?
(15:10:18) jwilden: Right...
(15:10:27) jwilden: ...so its me again
(15:10:29) copierrj: or link to a LATEST symlink thats updated automatically
(15:11:08) ndrs1: the latest link (for the documentation at least) points to the latest snapshot
(15:11:23) jwilden: True
(15:12:06) markusschneider: Johannes, are you willing to act as the responsible one here? At least, until we clarified the login situation?
(15:12:08) jwilden: Registration for the deegree event is up again, but without captcha. Seems like there is no time to do that now...
(15:12:17) markusschneider: Or Torsten?
(15:12:19) jwilden: Yes I can manage that
(15:12:22) torfri: what about generating both sides instead of manually edit them?
(15:12:54) ndrs1: torfri: you want to generate the drupal pages upon performing a release using maven?
(15:13:19) markusschneider: this would be great. probably we would need a drupal plugin, though
(15:13:20) torfri: The build job could create and deploy a static html page
(15:13:20) jwilden: That would be nice
(15:13:48) ndrs1: ok, so can you guys try to do that? We don't have access to the web server
(15:15:04) jwilden: I'll create a ticket
(15:15:40) markusschneider: ok, thank you.
(15:16:03) ndrs1: that won't really solve the problem unless someone actually does it...
(15:16:08) ndrs1: but ok
(15:16:19) markusschneider: we may also find the time to talk about this at the community space...
(15:16:49) markusschneider: Now to the open tracker tickets...
(15:17:23) markusschneider: we went through the whole list on the meeting before the last one.
(15:17:33) markusschneider: https://wiki.deegree.org/deegreeWiki/TmcMeeting/TmcMeeting20121015
(15:17:57) ndrs1: so we're still waiting on some PSC input
(15:18:19) markusschneider: but lets go through this very quickly...
(15:18:51) markusschneider: JIRA: http://wald.intevation.org/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=6321&group_id=27&atid=303
(15:18:59) markusschneider: Waiting for PSC comment.
(15:19:17) markusschneider: Regular pre-release builds/quality assurance: http://wald.intevation.org/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=6294&group_id=27&atid=303
(15:19:38) markusschneider: Johannes, any updates?
(15:19:57) jwilden: Not yet
(15:20:09) jwilden: I think I'll have some time on friday to finally do something
(15:20:47) markusschneider: ok. maybe we can also find some time at the community space for this?
(15:20:52) markusschneider: http://wald.intevation.org/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=6297&group_id=27&atid=303
(15:20:56) markusschneider: Find a usable definition of "stable" for deegree modules
(15:22:08) markusschneider: I believe we may be able to finally proceed here after reaching a consensus on the stability process.
(15:22:34) markusschneider: Prepare a suggestion for maintained components/modules: http://wald.intevation.org/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=6298&group_id=27&atid=303
(15:22:58) ndrs1: I've got no progress on getting the site running since the build server is down/broken
(15:23:26) markusschneider: This is about auto-generation of the modules list, right?
(15:23:52) ndrs1: yes, we wanted to get the module list integrated into the site (including status/description etc)
(15:24:02) markusschneider: ok
(15:24:18) markusschneider: Migrate source code to git, possibly using bitbucket: http://wald.intevation.org/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=6322&group_id=27&atid=303
(15:24:24) markusschneider: waiting for psc comment
(15:24:41) markusschneider: http://wald.intevation.org/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=6387&group_id=27&atid=303: Update the deegree 3 roadmap
(15:24:59) markusschneider: I started this (as described on the mailing list).
(15:25:29) markusschneider: Any comments? http://wiki.deegree.org/deegreeWiki/deegree3/Roadmap
(15:26:40) markusschneider: I am a bit unsure how to proceed with the roadmap...
(15:27:25) ndrs1: I suppose we work on what we can, and update the roadmap with the nice green icons as appropriate
(15:27:48) markusschneider: but does the psc need to comment on the fact that we dropped the crs fixes?
(15:28:27) ndrs1: I seem to remember the PSC wanted to talk about what's funded and what's not, right?
(15:28:49) markusschneider: so maybe add this as a discussion subject as well?
(15:29:06) ndrs1: sure, if people are interested
(15:29:42) ndrs1: +1
(15:29:43) markusschneider: +1
(15:29:49) copierrj: +1
(15:30:41) markusschneider: Thanks. Version numbering schema used for deegree: http://wald.intevation.org/tracker/?atid=303&group_id=27&func=browse
(15:30:53) markusschneider: This is how the "Stability Manifesto" originated.
(15:31:12) markusschneider: Can we close this?
(15:31:22) markusschneider: Torsten?
(15:31:41) markusschneider: You submitted this. Do you consider it finished?
(15:32:08) torfri: Well, since it is postponed to 4.x it is not finished
(15:32:37) markusschneider: sorry, wrong link: http://wald.intevation.org/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=6389&group_id=27&atid=303
(15:33:05) ndrs1: well, if we decide to switch to that when arriving at 4.0, isn't the ticket then 'fixed'?
(15:33:27) ndrs1: so we should probably wait for the discussion on the community space
(15:33:27) torfri: I will try to clarify my point in the ticket and comment on the http://wiki.deegree.org/deegreeWiki/deegree3/StabilityManifestoDraft page
(15:33:38) markusschneider: great
(15:33:59) markusschneider: Define actions for deegree 3.2 release: http://wald.intevation.org/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=6391&group_id=27&atid=303
(15:34:20) markusschneider: IMHO, this goes well together with the discussion on the roadmap at the community space.
(15:34:30) ndrs1: +1
(15:34:31) copierrj: +1
(15:34:41) jwilden: +1
(15:34:45) torfri: Who is owner of this task?
(15:34:53) markusschneider: That would be me.
(15:35:06) markusschneider: no, i added it. sorry
(15:35:21) ndrs1: since it's about the release, how about it's a release manager task?
(15:35:47) markusschneider: i guess that makes sense
(15:36:12) markusschneider: johannes, is it ok if i change the owner?
(15:37:24) markusschneider: ok. i will discuss this with johannes later then
(15:37:41) markusschneider: Propose process for dealing with feature requests in the deegree issue tracker: http://wald.intevation.org/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=1275&group_id=27&atid=303
(15:38:01) jwilden: ok
(15:38:06) markusschneider: thanks!
(15:38:30) markusschneider: Maybe we can close this ticket.
(15:38:52) markusschneider: The process has been proposed. We need a new ticket that concerns the implementation of the process.
(15:38:57) torfri: still on hold since the issue tracker question is not solved. To setup Trac to support this process requires some effort
(15:39:06) markusschneider: yes, i saw your comments
(15:39:15) markusschneider: can you confirm that this would be possible?
(15:41:11) torfri: technically it is possible
(15:41:37) torfri: the effort is the issue
(15:41:45) ndrs1: well, since it seems we won't get an organizational solution anytime soon, maybe we should do it?
(15:42:06) markusschneider: torsten: yes, thats what i thought. i guess we need to talk on the tracker thing at the community space anyway?
(15:42:40) ndrs1: +1 (we have the infrastructure slot anyway)
(15:42:48) copierrj: +1
(15:42:52) torfri: yes
(15:42:55) markusschneider: +1
(15:43:02) jwilden: +1
(15:43:06) markusschneider: ok. last one :-)
(15:43:10) markusschneider: Define API and configuration compatibility process/guidelines: http://wald.intevation.org/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=6393&group_id=27&atid=303
(15:43:15) markusschneider: we had that.
(15:43:19) markusschneider: :-)
(15:43:38) markusschneider: I really hope that we can close some of the tickets after community space...
(15:43:45) ndrs1: +1
(15:43:51) copierrj: would be nice...
(15:43:54) jwilden: I hope so too
(15:44:06) markusschneider: thank you. when shall will have the next TMC meeting?
(15:44:17) markusschneider: next week?
(15:44:28) markusschneider: or in two weeks?
(15:44:44) jwilden: Do we need one before the event?
(15:45:00) markusschneider: i don't know. what do you think?
(15:45:09) ndrs1: I guess it would be better. We don't necessarily have to go through the tickets again next week :-)
(15:45:12) copierrj: maybe we could do a f2f meeting during the event?
(15:45:29) jwilden: agreed
(15:45:32) markusschneider: well, this will probably happen...
(15:46:02) ndrs1: let's do a short one next week to see if we need to prepare something before the event
(15:46:06) jwilden: Ok
(15:46:08) ndrs1: nothing else on the agenda
(15:46:08) markusschneider: +1
(15:46:10) copierrj: +1
(15:46:15) ndrs1: +1
(15:46:48) markusschneider: good then. see you next week! and watch the mailing list :-)
(15:46:57) jwilden: :)
(15:47:00) copierrj: ok, cu
(15:47:01) ndrs1: will do, bye...
(15:47:02) jwilden: See you