On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 9:12 AM, Tom Hughes <t...@compton.nu> wrote: > That's not strictly accurate - the JSON API one did not get closed.
That's true, but my two bugs did get closed. More on this below. > Personally I'm not a fan of using bug trackers for things that aren't either > actual bugs, or concrete proposals with patches attached. I added two issues. First was one about caching of .../:element/:id/:version calls. Looking at the code, we set no cache headers, even though OSM elements of a certain version are immutable; that seems like a mere oversight. And I suggested that we could make a redirect of ../:element/:id calls to the object's version url. Code would be forthcoming, by me, in the next two weeks. Not today, probably, because I'm flying to SOTM US. The reason for this code is that with Changemonger (the project I'm presenting on during Sunday's sessions), I make a lot of individual object calls, and I've been thinking about caching in general. This issue was closed by Tom with little/no explanation. I made a second issue at the same time regarding gathering histrorical data around way geometry. Right now, due to the way OSM stores its geometry data, the only way to know about a way's geometry history is to call the history call for the way, then make a history call for each and every node that was ever in the way. This is expensive. Talking with Matt about this a month ago on IRC, he suggested a new call could be made, one that would do the above work in a single call. This would allow the same work to be done with less server overhead, and greater resource management. Tom closed it, saying he didn't like expensive calls. This is despite the fact that other people/peojects are already either using the above method (which is more expensive) or continuing to use the undocumented h > This is obviously a little different because you guys are planning to work > on these things, but issue trackers that are acquiring things at a faster > rate than things are being closed have an unfortunate effect on my brain > where I start trying to figure out how to get rid of some things in order to > get things "under control" again. If you're suggesting that the problem is "These tickets are not marked as wishlist and not given to anyone" - then I agree. I should have assigned the first one to me, at the very least. The second one, I thought needed a little more thinking through. > As it happens I also wasn't aware that you wouldn't be able to reopen the > issue in the way a reporter can in trac. > > My personal opinion is that, as Andy has said, the rails-dev list is > probably the best place for early stage discussions, but I've reopened the > tickets which did get closed for now and if people prefer to do the > discussion there then fine. That's fine, but it's very frustrating to have a ticket closed without discussion. It's really disheartening. - Serge _______________________________________________ dev mailing list dev@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/dev
