RFC-7

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
11 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

RFC-7

Dan Little-2
Hey Folks!

This is the official authorization for GM3.0... please comment and vote!


Thanks!

-Duck

_______________________________________________
geomoose-psc mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geomoose-psc
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: RFC-7

blammo
Vote:  +1

Just one comment (not a make break by any means) . . .

GOALS (#7), does MS4W need to be specified?  There's nothing in there about any other OS for example.

Actually after pondering a bit more, wouldn’t MS4W be another (optional) toolchain component?

bobb


On Jul 10, 2017, at 4:10 PM, Dan Little <[hidden email]> wrote:

Hey Folks!

This is the official authorization for GM3.0... please comment and vote!


Thanks!

-Duck
_______________________________________________
geomoose-psc mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geomoose-psc



"Interesting - I use a Mac to help me design the next Cray." 
- Seymoure Cray (1925-1996) when he was told that Apple Inc. had recently bought a Cray supercomputer to help them design the next Mac.




_______________________________________________
geomoose-psc mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geomoose-psc
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: RFC-7

Dan Little-2
Windows compatibility was a notable fault if the previous build chain. It's notably as a maxim/goal and definitely not a subcomponent. 

On Jul 10, 2017 4:58 PM, "Basques, Bob (CI-StPaul)" <[hidden email]> wrote:
Vote:  +1

Just one comment (not a make break by any means) . . .

GOALS (#7), does MS4W need to be specified?  There's nothing in there about any other OS for example.

Actually after pondering a bit more, wouldn’t MS4W be another (optional) toolchain component?

bobb


On Jul 10, 2017, at 4:10 PM, Dan Little <[hidden email]> wrote:

Hey Folks!

This is the official authorization for GM3.0... please comment and vote!


Thanks!

-Duck
_______________________________________________
geomoose-psc mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geomoose-psc



"Interesting - I use a Mac to help me design the next Cray." 
- Seymoure Cray (1925-1996) when he was told that Apple Inc. had recently bought a Cray supercomputer to help them design the next Mac.




_______________________________________________
geomoose-psc mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geomoose-psc
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: RFC-7

Brian Fischer

+1

 

Brian Fischer

GIS Project Manager, Principal

Houston Engineering, Inc.

O 763.493.4522 | D 763.493.6664 | M 763.229.2734

 

From: geomoose-psc [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Dan Little
Sent: Monday, July 10, 2017 5:17 PM
To: Bob Basques <[hidden email]>
Cc: GeoMOOSE PSC <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [geomoose-psc] RFC-7

 

[External Email]


Windows compatibility was a notable fault if the previous build chain. It's notably as a maxim/goal and definitely not a subcomponent. 

 

On Jul 10, 2017 4:58 PM, "Basques, Bob (CI-StPaul)" <[hidden email]> wrote:

Vote:  +1

 

Just one comment (not a make break by any means) . . .

 

GOALS (#7), does MS4W need to be specified?  There's nothing in there about any other OS for example.

 

Actually after pondering a bit more, wouldn’t MS4W be another (optional) toolchain component?

 

bobb

 

 

On Jul 10, 2017, at 4:10 PM, Dan Little <[hidden email]> wrote:

 

Hey Folks!

 

This is the official authorization for GM3.0... please comment and vote!

 

 

Thanks!

 

-Duck

_______________________________________________
geomoose-psc mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geomoose-psc

 

 

"Interesting - I use a Mac to help me design the next Cray." 

- Seymoure Cray (1925-1996) when he was told that Apple Inc. had recently bought a Cray supercomputer to help them design the next Mac.

 

 

 


_______________________________________________
geomoose-psc mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geomoose-psc
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: RFC-7

Brent Fraser
In reply to this post by Dan Little-2

+1

Best Regards,
Brent Fraser
On 7/10/2017 3:10 PM, Dan Little wrote:
Hey Folks!

This is the official authorization for GM3.0... please comment and vote!


Thanks!

-Duck


_______________________________________________
geomoose-psc mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geomoose-psc


_______________________________________________
geomoose-psc mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geomoose-psc
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: RFC-7

James Klassen-2
In reply to this post by Dan Little-2
+1

On Jul 10, 2017 4:10 PM, "Dan Little" <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hey Folks!

This is the official authorization for GM3.0... please comment and vote!


Thanks!

-Duck

_______________________________________________
geomoose-psc mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geomoose-psc

_______________________________________________
geomoose-psc mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geomoose-psc
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: RFC-7

Dan Little-2
Bump! Eli, TC, can we get a vote?

On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 9:00 AM, James Klassen <[hidden email]> wrote:
+1

On Jul 10, 2017 4:10 PM, "Dan Little" <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hey Folks!

This is the official authorization for GM3.0... please comment and vote!


Thanks!

-Duck

_______________________________________________
geomoose-psc mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geomoose-psc


_______________________________________________
geomoose-psc mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geomoose-psc
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: RFC-7

TC Haddad
+1

On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 10:55 AM, Dan Little <[hidden email]> wrote:
Bump! Eli, TC, can we get a vote?

On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 9:00 AM, James Klassen <[hidden email]> wrote:
+1

On Jul 10, 2017 4:10 PM, "Dan Little" <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hey Folks!

This is the official authorization for GM3.0... please comment and vote!


Thanks!

-Duck

_______________________________________________
geomoose-psc mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geomoose-psc


_______________________________________________
geomoose-psc mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geomoose-psc


_______________________________________________
geomoose-psc mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geomoose-psc
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: RFC-7

Eli Adam
I've been offline and will vote +0 for now in the absence of catching
up and testing.

Is the release in accordance with
https://www.geomoose.org/rfc/rfc-3.html and
https://www.geomoose.org/developer/release.html#how-to-release (does
this need updating and/or a new 3.# version)?

Supporting Windows in the development tool chain is very admirable but
I'm not entirely sure needed.  Supporting Windows fully for deployment
is really important.  Many things, arguably not part of the
development tool chain, (nightly builds, post commit hooks, release
preparation, etc) are done in bash and other things.

Oh, I see that I'm confused.  This isn't for a release, this is to
undertake the 3.0 direction.  Yeah, +1.

Eli


On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 5:12 PM, TC Haddad <[hidden email]> wrote:

> +1
>
> On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 10:55 AM, Dan Little <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>>
>> Bump! Eli, TC, can we get a vote?
>>
>> On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 9:00 AM, James Klassen <[hidden email]>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> +1
>>>
>>> On Jul 10, 2017 4:10 PM, "Dan Little" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hey Folks!
>>>>
>>>> This is the official authorization for GM3.0... please comment and vote!
>>>>
>>>> - https://geomoose.org/rfc/rfc-7.html
>>>>
>>>> Thanks!
>>>>
>>>> -Duck
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> geomoose-psc mailing list
>>>> [hidden email]
>>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geomoose-psc
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> geomoose-psc mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geomoose-psc
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> geomoose-psc mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geomoose-psc
_______________________________________________
geomoose-psc mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geomoose-psc
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: RFC-7

James Klassen-2
Supporting Windows for the toolchain is important (I bet people never thought I'd write that) because many organizations are effectively stuck on Windows. Forcing them to build in an unfamiliar Linux VM effectively means they wouldn't be able to build and would be unnecessarily limited in their ability to participate in the GeoMoose community.

We want to encourage people to contribute fixes, enhancements, tests, documentation, and build a shared knowledge through experimentation with GeoMoose.  We want to make it easy to transition from just downloading and configuring it to making a few simple code changes and fixes to working fully in git.

This is now feasible given the work the nodejs people and git people have done to port the tools to Windows.  This includes a more or less usable bash shell and common commands. So there is no longer a technical necessity not support building on Windows.

On Jul 19, 2017 7:04 PM, "Eli Adam" <[hidden email]> wrote:
I've been offline and will vote +0 for now in the absence of catching
up and testing.

Is the release in accordance with
https://www.geomoose.org/rfc/rfc-3.html and
https://www.geomoose.org/developer/release.html#how-to-release (does
this need updating and/or a new 3.# version)?

Supporting Windows in the development tool chain is very admirable but
I'm not entirely sure needed.  Supporting Windows fully for deployment
is really important.  Many things, arguably not part of the
development tool chain, (nightly builds, post commit hooks, release
preparation, etc) are done in bash and other things.

Oh, I see that I'm confused.  This isn't for a release, this is to
undertake the 3.0 direction.  Yeah, +1.

Eli


On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 5:12 PM, TC Haddad <[hidden email]> wrote:
> +1
>
> On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 10:55 AM, Dan Little <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>>
>> Bump! Eli, TC, can we get a vote?
>>
>> On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 9:00 AM, James Klassen <[hidden email]>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> +1
>>>
>>> On Jul 10, 2017 4:10 PM, "Dan Little" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hey Folks!
>>>>
>>>> This is the official authorization for GM3.0... please comment and vote!
>>>>
>>>> - https://geomoose.org/rfc/rfc-7.html
>>>>
>>>> Thanks!
>>>>
>>>> -Duck
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> geomoose-psc mailing list
>>>> [hidden email]
>>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geomoose-psc
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> geomoose-psc mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geomoose-psc
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> geomoose-psc mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geomoose-psc
_______________________________________________
geomoose-psc mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geomoose-psc

_______________________________________________
geomoose-psc mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geomoose-psc
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: RFC-7

Dan Little-2
So sayeth we all, so it shall be.

On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 8:48 PM, James Klassen <[hidden email]> wrote:
Supporting Windows for the toolchain is important (I bet people never thought I'd write that) because many organizations are effectively stuck on Windows. Forcing them to build in an unfamiliar Linux VM effectively means they wouldn't be able to build and would be unnecessarily limited in their ability to participate in the GeoMoose community.

We want to encourage people to contribute fixes, enhancements, tests, documentation, and build a shared knowledge through experimentation with GeoMoose.  We want to make it easy to transition from just downloading and configuring it to making a few simple code changes and fixes to working fully in git.

This is now feasible given the work the nodejs people and git people have done to port the tools to Windows.  This includes a more or less usable bash shell and common commands. So there is no longer a technical necessity not support building on Windows.

On Jul 19, 2017 7:04 PM, "Eli Adam" <[hidden email]> wrote:
I've been offline and will vote +0 for now in the absence of catching
up and testing.

Is the release in accordance with
https://www.geomoose.org/rfc/rfc-3.html and
https://www.geomoose.org/developer/release.html#how-to-release (does
this need updating and/or a new 3.# version)?

Supporting Windows in the development tool chain is very admirable but
I'm not entirely sure needed.  Supporting Windows fully for deployment
is really important.  Many things, arguably not part of the
development tool chain, (nightly builds, post commit hooks, release
preparation, etc) are done in bash and other things.

Oh, I see that I'm confused.  This isn't for a release, this is to
undertake the 3.0 direction.  Yeah, +1.

Eli


On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 5:12 PM, TC Haddad <[hidden email]> wrote:
> +1
>
> On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 10:55 AM, Dan Little <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>>
>> Bump! Eli, TC, can we get a vote?
>>
>> On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 9:00 AM, James Klassen <[hidden email]>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> +1
>>>
>>> On Jul 10, 2017 4:10 PM, "Dan Little" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hey Folks!
>>>>
>>>> This is the official authorization for GM3.0... please comment and vote!
>>>>
>>>> - https://geomoose.org/rfc/rfc-7.html
>>>>
>>>> Thanks!
>>>>
>>>> -Duck
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> geomoose-psc mailing list
>>>> [hidden email]
>>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geomoose-psc
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> geomoose-psc mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geomoose-psc
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> geomoose-psc mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geomoose-psc
_______________________________________________
geomoose-psc mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geomoose-psc


_______________________________________________
geomoose-psc mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geomoose-psc
Loading...