Just that Andrea suggested the next version of GeoServer be 22.0 (see Subject
line) with some pseudo-math support argument. I'm not particularly worried
about what we call it (GS 20.0 works for me), but consistency would be helpful.
-Original Message-
From: Ben Caradoc-Davies
Sent:
I do not understand why 22.0. I could understand 2.14.0 -> 14.0 (like
Solaris) and then max(GT_VERSION, GS_VERSION). Is 22.0 a typo, or
/r/wsh?
On 13/07/18 11:21, br...@frogmouth.net wrote:
Or the next geotools is 22.0. Version numbers are pretty cheap, wasting a few
isn't a big deal.
Slightly tangential: The date-based thing might work well if we're going to do
the Enterprise versioning packaging.
-Original Message-
From: Ben Caradoc-Davies
Sent: Friday, 13 July 2018 9:06 AM
To: br...@frogmouth.net; 'Andrea Aime' ;
'Geoserver-devel'
Subject: Re: [Geoserver-devel]
Or the next geotools is 22.0. Version numbers are pretty cheap, wasting a few
isn't a big deal.
-Original Message-
From: Ben Caradoc-Davies
Sent: Friday, 13 July 2018 9:06 AM
To: br...@frogmouth.net; 'Andrea Aime' ;
'Geoserver-devel'
Subject: Re: [Geoserver-devel] Thinking out
On 13/07/18 10:13, br...@frogmouth.net wrote:
Having geoserver and geotools use the same version numbers would probably be
easier to remember.
This. Which would make the next GeoServer 20.0. GeoWebCache could get
the same treatment.
Unless we want to call them all 2018.10 (given that 18.x
Hi Andrea,
I believe it was Chrome that popularised the "every other release is a
major release" thing, and so of course FireFox ended up following suit
(number envy?). Fortunately FireFox has LTS\ESR releases, so sensible
organisations use those.
Personally I'm a fan of the current
I am going to forward this chain to another couple of people internal here and
get back to you.
Chris Snider
Senior Software Engineer
[cid:image001.png@01D2E6A5.9104F820]
From: br...@frogmouth.net [mailto:br...@frogmouth.net]
Sent: Thursday, July 12, 2018 4:14 PM
To: 'Andrea Aime' ;
I would suggest adopting semantic versioning, which means everything will be
major versions (because of the geotools versioning). Having geoserver and
geotools use the same version numbers would probably be easier to remember.
I do get Chris’ concern (its mainly a US DoD thing – version
My experience has been that some projects are stuck on old browsers for a long
time. For example, one project was stuck on Internet Explorer 11.0 for several
years, and I believe has only recently been approved to move to Edge.
Same thing applied to Firefox, although I don’t recall what
Just a thought;
Many businesses and governments will grant a project authority to include a
major level of a product, for example GeoServer 2.x. If GeoServer moves to a
version numbering scheme that adjusts the commonly viewed major version number,
then these users may not be able to upgrade
Awesome, thank you!
Cheers
Andrea
On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 5:52 PM, Torben Barsballe <
tbarsba...@boundlessgeo.com> wrote:
> More space has been added, and the doc build appears to be running
> smoothly again.
>
> Torben
>
> On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 4:18 PM, Torben Barsballe <
>
More space has been added, and the doc build appears to be running smoothly
again.
Torben
On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 4:18 PM, Torben Barsballe <
tbarsba...@boundlessgeo.com> wrote:
> I'm looking into it, the server has indeed run out of space. Trying to see
> if I can get the quota enlarged.
>
>
Dear lists,
I would like here to ask your opinion about a possible
extension/improvement of the GeoServer WPS Service.
*The main goal of this proposal is to allow a client to recognize the list
of WPS Executions through a simple request to a WPS Operation. What we
would like to achieve would be
13 matches
Mail list logo
