Project Steering- Committee Logo Volunteers Major Tasks Goals Design Principles Who's Who Suggested Reading List

MapWindow4 GIS Steering Committee

Committee Notes

  • Current committee members: Dan (in the chair), Paul, Ted, Brian, Gerd
  • Consensus
    • Please add/edit/delete from list below:
      • add your name after points you agree or can live with
      • add new points you want to see addressed
      • change wording for points no one has so far agreed to
      • add your reservation in form of comments to points you do not agree with while others do
      • ... anything more ?


===============================================

  • MapWindow Steering committees: suggested by Dan, added to by Gerd;
    • one committee of at least one per interest group to set guidelines:
      • project planning and direction (Dan + ...)
      • discussion forum responsibility (Paul, Brian + ?)
      • built version and repository organisation (Paul + ...)
      • Web page (old and new ) layout and content (see below)
      • etc.
  • Work/responsibility allocation:
    • Who actually does what?
    • Finding helpers?
    • Is the old wiki concept still valid: "Volunteers will just come out of the wood works"?
    • etc.
  • Splitting documentation/literature stuff from technical stuff
    • initially suggested by Paul and supported by Dan
    • Brian suggests not to split (in brad terms), but to move as much of the old MapWindow 4 stuff over to mapwindow4.codeplex (similar to Gerd's initial suggestion)
    • Ted wants to have code as close as possible to documentation ( and visa versa)
  • Old mapwindow.org web site:
    • Brian suggests not to split (in brad terms), but to move as much of the old MapWindow 4 stuff over to mapwindow4.codeplex (similar to Gerd's initial suggestion) OR
    • Keep it.
      • Paul/Dan suggest: Use MapWindow.org (and DotSpatial.org for that matter) as the main "user site" for people using our applications and libraries and needing user documentation, conference info, training, books, whatever else we want to generate down the road.
      • Add/edit front page to have correct links to CodePlex sites (may be under the heading "Technical Stuff")
      • Gerd suggest: Change Download page to show in comparative tabular form all the current MW download versions with download links. Show capabilities, requirements, restrictions, etc.
  • New CodePlex Sites:
    • Dan/Gerd suggest: overall common layout and feel for all sites
    • Paul/Dan suggest: Use the CodePlex sites as the behind the scene "workshops" where the projects are actually being built. Here we have the programmers slogging it out and sorting out bugs, source code, etc. ==> (Gerd suggest) restricted to technical stuff for developers, programming users and testers
    • Gerd suggest and Ted already uses this for DotSpatial: use sub pages for documenting sub-projects (e.g. MW4 plug-ins)
    • Paul comments/suggests: "I believe the consensus is to NOT have binaries on the codeplex sites. So it would be good if we can keep these folders:
      • http://svn..mapwindow.org/svnroot/MapWindow4Dev/Bin/
      • http://svn.mapwindow.org/svnroot/MapWindow4Dev/Bin64
      • And the installer folders: http://svn.mapwindow.org/svnroot/InstallationProjects/4.8/

** Paul comments: Too bad we cannot split the MapWindowPlugins project in subproject, but because we are already splitting MW4, DotSpatial, the OCX and the plug-ins we don't have 'global' SVN commit rights anymore. So that is good.

  • Gerd replies: CodePlex does not give support for sub-projects, but we can used additional pages linked from a main page for this purpose. See HomeBranch1 as an un-committed example. We also can have pages linked from pages linked from pages and so on.

 

  • Discussion Forum:
    • Any ideas?
  • SVN access:
    • Any ideas?
    • Brain suggest to have Mercurial repo instead of the old SVN housed under mapwindow4.codeplex
    • Ted also suggest to have Mercurial repo instead of the old SVN housed under mapwindow4.codeplex
  • Miscellaneous:
    • which license should we choose to impose on users of material provided here: GPL, MIT, or any other?
    • Any ideas (keeping documentation up to date, educational aspect, anything that comes to mind)



=============================================================================

Last edited Dec 29, 2010 at 11:37 PM by gngdowid, version 20

Comments

No comments yet.