Hi Ben, I'm not going into the origin of your fork decission. I'm sure *both* gvSIG and OA have made some communication mistakes. A direct communication would have avoided forks and time and resource wasting. For sure at gvSIG we are pushing forward for external developers to come in the project and join us.
Looking only at the future side, I encourage you to work together with gvSIG people. > We just take the current gvSIG OADE 2010 sources, > fix the remaining 2 or 3 critical bugs and release > that as gvSIG 1.9.1! It makes sense if we skip the stabilization process. The problem is: Do we skip it? If so, can we call it a stable version? If not, who is going to perform the stabilization process? Maybe the stabilization process is not important for you, because you have fixed those bugs, but for some organizations it's important, as they cannot rely on a beta or unofficial version. Would OA afford a stabilization process? If so, from gvSIG we can help to teach how to do it. > > Here are the reasons why I think this would make > sense: > > 1. The "branching problem" is immediately solved. > We can all work on the same code base towards > 1.9.2, 1.9.3 etc. as needed, until a fully functional > gvSIG 2.0 is out. I'm glad to see that you are open to work on the same code base. ;-) > > 2. Because this means a production use ready and maintained > (by me alone if I have to) version of 1.9.x would be > available, this would immediately take pressure off > the 2.0 development. Yes, that's true ... for developers. Not true for other people (testers, collaboration managers, release cycle people, ...). > > 3. At the time of writing, the number of modifications > I have made to the 1.9 sources is probably greater than > the number of modifications from other devs, so it would > be efficient: I only need to merge a few recent SVN > changes from your side, and the new SVN code is ready. I think that can be clarified with a skype chat with developers who have made commits on 1.9.X :-) > > 4. GvSIG OADE 2010 Beta 2 is already out and you can > test it to convince yourselves that the changes are > working OK. Well, you are using some beta components, so for being convinced, a full stabilization process should be performed. After that, everybody (OA, gvSIG, community) will be convinced. > > 5. OA could continue releasing an "OA branded" version > geared towards our archaeological users. This would > include things such as archaeological sample data and > support for Mac OS X (which is common among archaeologists). > We would also keep providing binaries with our customized > installer. You could just add links from the main gvSIG > download page to these installers. > > What do you think? I think it makes sense if we both work on the same code base (and docs, L10N files, bugtracking, ...). We like to see contributions from people like you, if you are willing to collaborate and work together. BTW, do you intend to shift from a beta to a stable version? > > Ben > > > _______________________________________________ Gvsig_internacional mailing list [email protected] http://listserv.gva.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gvsig_internacional
