Re: [Geotools-devel] proposal: reduce proposal time limit to ten days

2020-03-09 Thread Nuno Oliveira 
I think 14 days is too much, but looks like everyone else is happy with
14 days, so +0
On Tue, 2020-03-03 at 11:42 -0800, Jody Garnett wrote:
> Sorry I should of said 14 days (so that we get a balance of weekend,
> workweek, and one of our meetings for discussion). Thanks!
> 
> And here is my +1
> 
> --
> Jody Garnett
> 
> 
> On Tue, 3 Mar 2020 at 11:35, Jody Garnett 
> wrote:
> > Our current proposal time limit was set in the days of subversion
> > when we had a single "trunk" and relatively strong
> > divisions between modules in our library. The idea being that a 3-
> > day waiting period was good enough for feedback before starting
> > work :)
> > 
> > To avoid stagnation by lack of interest/time from community members
> > the following assurances are provided:
> > svn access for changes is granted within 3 days from the proposal
> > proposal is accepted ‘automatically’ within 15 days (unless
> > objections are raised)
> > Now that we have GitHub and pull requests developers can work more
> > independently "svn access" is no longer a bottleneck, however it is
> > still easy to let proposals alone for days without feedback (and
> > then be surprised when the pull request comes in.
> > 
> > I would like to propose reducing our "accepted automatically" time
> > to 10 days (giving two work weeks, and two weekends for PMC
> > feedback).
> > 
> > I think we can also start sharing proposals with the user list
> > 
> > Here is what that change looks like:
> > 
> > To avoid stagnation by lack of interest/time from community
> > members:
> > please share work-in-progress as a draft pull request for early
> > feedback
> > community feedback and welcomed and encouraged
> > any remaining proposal PMC votes considered +0  ‘automatically’
> > after 10 days
> > 
> > --
> > Jody Garnett
> > 
> ___
> GeoTools-Devel mailing list
> GeoTools-Devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geotools-devel
-- 
Regards,
Nuno Oliveira
==
GeoServer Professional Services from the
experts! 
Visit http://goo.gl/it488V for more information.
==

Nuno Miguel Carvalho Oliveira
@nmcoliveira
Software Engineer

GeoSolutions S.A.S.
Via di Montramito 3/A
55054  Massarosa (LU)
Italy
phone: +39 0584 962313
fax:      +39 0584 1660272

http://www.geo-solutions.it
http://twitter.com/geosolutions_it

---

Con riferimento alla normativa sul trattamento dei dati 
personali (Reg. UE 2016/679 - Regolamento generale sulla 
protezione dei dati “GDPR”), si precisa che ogni 
circostanza inerente alla presente email (il suo contenuto, 
gli eventuali allegati, etc.) è un dato la cui conoscenza 
è riservata al/i solo/i destinatario/i indicati dallo 
scrivente. Se il messaggio Le è giunto per errore, è 
tenuta/o a cancellarlo, ogni altra operazione è illecita. 
Le sarei comunque grato se potesse darmene notizia.

This email is intended only for the person or entity to 
which it is addressed and may contain information that 
is privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from 
disclosure. We remind that - as provided by European 
Regulation 2016/679 “GDPR” - copying, dissemination or 
use of this e-mail or the information herein by anyone 
other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you 
have received this email by mistake, please notify 
us immediately by telephone or e-mail.
___
GeoTools-Devel mailing list
GeoTools-Devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geotools-devel

Re: [Geotools-devel] proposal: reduce proposal time limit to ten days

2020-03-09 Thread Andrea Aime 
+1 with having a limit (it's really missing in GeoServer I believe)
Don't care too much if 14 or 10 days, minor difference.

Cheers
Andrea

On Tue, Mar 3, 2020 at 8:45 PM Jody Garnett  wrote:

> Sorry I should of said 14 days (so that we get a balance of weekend,
> workweek, and one of our meetings for discussion). Thanks!
>
> And here is my +1
>
> --
> Jody Garnett
>
>
> On Tue, 3 Mar 2020 at 11:35, Jody Garnett  wrote:
>
>> Our current proposal time limit was set in the days of subversion when we
>> had a single "trunk" and relatively strong divisions between modules in our
>> library. The idea being that a 3-day waiting period was good enough for
>> feedback before starting work :)
>>
>> To avoid stagnation by lack of interest/time from community members the
>> following assurances are provided:
>>
>>
>>- svn access for changes is granted within 3 days from the proposal
>>- proposal is accepted ‘automatically’ within 15 days (unless
>>objections are raised)
>>
>> Now that we have GitHub and pull requests developers can work more
>> independently "svn access" is no longer a bottleneck, however it is still
>> easy to let proposals alone for days without feedback (and then be
>> surprised when the pull request comes in.
>>
>> I would like to propose reducing our "accepted automatically" time to 10
>> days (giving two work weeks, and two weekends for PMC feedback).
>>
>> I think we can also start sharing proposals with the user list
>>
>> Here is what that change looks like:
>>
>> To avoid stagnation by lack of interest/time from community members:
>>
>>
>>- please share work-in-progress as a draft pull request for early
>>   feedback
>>   - community feedback and welcomed and encouraged
>>   - any remaining proposal PMC votes considered +0  ‘automatically’
>>   after 10 days
>>
>>
>> --
>> Jody Garnett
>>
> ___
> GeoTools-Devel mailing list
> GeoTools-Devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geotools-devel
>


-- 

Regards, Andrea Aime == GeoServer Professional Services from the experts!
Visit http://goo.gl/it488V for more information. == Ing. Andrea Aime
@geowolf Technical Lead GeoSolutions S.A.S. Via di Montramito 3/A 55054
Massarosa (LU) phone: +39 0584 962313 fax: +39 0584 1660272 mob: +39 339
8844549 http://www.geo-solutions.it http://twitter.com/geosolutions_it
--- *Con riferimento
alla normativa sul trattamento dei dati personali (Reg. UE 2016/679 -
Regolamento generale sulla protezione dei dati “GDPR”), si precisa che ogni
circostanza inerente alla presente email (il suo contenuto, gli eventuali
allegati, etc.) è un dato la cui conoscenza è riservata al/i solo/i
destinatario/i indicati dallo scrivente. Se il messaggio Le è giunto per
errore, è tenuta/o a cancellarlo, ogni altra operazione è illecita. Le
sarei comunque grato se potesse darmene notizia. This email is intended
only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain
information that is privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from
disclosure. We remind that - as provided by European Regulation 2016/679
“GDPR” - copying, dissemination or use of this e-mail or the information
herein by anyone other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you
have received this email by mistake, please notify us immediately by
telephone or e-mail.*
___
GeoTools-Devel mailing list
GeoTools-Devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geotools-devel

Re: [Geotools-devel] Upgrade to ojdbc8 oracle driver?

2020-03-09 Thread Mark Prins 

Created:
- https://osgeo-org.atlassian.net/browse/GEOT-6529
- https://osgeo-org.atlassian.net/browse/GEOS-9535

Will follow up on those issues with PR's ASAP

Mark


On 02-03-2020 19:12, Jody Garnett wrote:

A PR would be great, and we can include the *Oracle Free Use Terms and
Conditions (FUTC)* license in the extension if that is what is required.

Also individual extensions can make notices in the server status modules 
tab, if they want to report availability of a library, or link to some 
license notice (if that is required in the running application).

--
Jody Garnett


On Mon, 2 Mar 2020 at 02:45, Mark Prins > wrote:


On 13-12-2019 11:08, Jody Garnett wrote:
 > Following up on last meetings discussion on supporting oracle:
Oracle
 > JDBC drivers on Maven Central
 >


 >
 > Based on the I would like to remove the manual process of installing
 > ojdbc7 into your local repo, and replace with something like:
 >
 >      
 >       com.oracle.ojdbc
 >       ojdbc8
 >       19.3.0.0
 >      
 >
 > Can I ask if anyone is using odjbc8 already?

I don't think this happened yet has it?

Oracle's first try at using Maven central was nearly succesful;
advancing insights made them decide to move the drivers to diffent
groupId's as described in the post om medium [1]

the TLDR:
- all versions now available (19.3.0.0, 18.3.0.0, 12.2.0.1 and some
11.2.0.4)
- new groupId for production jar's at com.oracle.database.jdbc
- net groupId for debug jars (postfixed with _g) at
com.oracle.database.jdbc.debug
- all have sources + javadoc jar's as required

so above snippet should be

      
        com.oracle.database.jdbc
        ojdbc8
        19.3.0.0
      

for production use, or

      
        com.oracle.database.jdbc.debug
        ojdbc8_g
        19.3.0.0
      

for debugging.

I can prepare a PR if you like.

Not sure where to a a note about the license "Oracle Free Use Terms and
Conditions (FUTC)"
(I think that would only concern geoserver as that would/could
distribute the driver jar with the extension. Some lawyer should decide
on that I guess.)

[1]

https://medium.com/@kuassimensah/all-in-and-new-groupids-oracle-jdbc-drivers-on-maven-central-a76d545954c6




___
GeoTools-Devel mailing list
GeoTools-Devel@lists.sourceforge.net

https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geotools-devel





___
GeoTools-Devel mailing list
GeoTools-Devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geotools-devel