+1 Paul On 7-Oct-07, at 10:24 PM, Christopher Schmidt wrote:
> There have been no new regressions reported in the OpenLayers 2.5 > release in the time since the release of RC5. > > There is currently one outstanding issue that Tim had marked for > 2.5 -- > an improvement to GeometryCollection handling in GeoJSON parsing -- > but > it isn't a regression, and the use case where it actually affects > people > is very small. I'm of the opinion that since the GeoJSON spec is > not yet > 'done' -- there still could be more changes to it -- we shouldn't hold > the release for another edge case lack of support: instead, if we > really > do want this into something we call 2.5, I'd be in favor of pulling it > back and doing a 2.5.1 when the spec is complete. (See > http://trac.openlayers.org/ticket/1067 -- this lack of funtionality > only > affects the case where a feature is passed with a > GeometryCollection as > the geometry.) > > With that being the only outstanding issue, I'd like to motion that we > release OpenLayers 2.5 on Tuesday afternoon eastern time -- in > about 40 > hours -- unless we hear anything new in terms of bug reports in the > meantime. This release would not include the fix for #1067. (If the > PSC > hasn't voted by that time, I propose that the release be made as > soon as > the PSC has voted.) > > I'm +1 on doing this, and will do the release engineering work if > there > are votes against releasing. > > Additionally, I'd like to put #1067 in trunk, and after the GeoJSON > specification has been finalized, we pull any changes to the GeoJSON > format back into a 2.5.1 after sufficient testing. The change that > we're > looking at is, imho, too risky to put into a 2.5 release this late in > the game -- I screwed that up once already ;) (Hence the RC5 > instead of > RC4.) I'm interested in what the developer community thinks about > doing > this specifically to support full GeoJSON. > > The biggest reason for supporting the GeoJSON spec so strongly is that > it is a format that we can round trip effectively, unlike many other > formats. The simple feature model and limited geometry model allow > us to > fully support GeoJSON input/output in OpenLayers, and that's important > for people to be able to have/understand. > > Looking forward to feedback on either of these two items, and would > like > to get the PSC to vote on the 2.5 release when they get a chance. > > Regards, > -- > Christopher Schmidt > MetaCarta > _______________________________________________ > Dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://openlayers.org/mailman/listinfo/dev +-----------------------------------------------------------------+ |Paul Spencer [EMAIL PROTECTED] | +-----------------------------------------------------------------+ |Chief Technology Officer | |DM Solutions Group Inc http://www.dmsolutions.ca/ | +-----------------------------------------------------------------+ _______________________________________________ Dev mailing list [email protected] http://openlayers.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
