pyogclib-developers

[Pyogclib-developers] Releasing pyogclib

[Sean G. <sgi...@fr...>]

Let's make a first release of the library.

The WMSClient module is ready to go.  Jan has said that he's already
used it, and I'd like to release new versions of other software that
would use the library.

The WMSServer module remains in a state that is really only useful
with MapServer, but I think that we shouldn't let this hold up a
release.  If we call this 0.1, I think I'd rather wait till 0.2 to
have a more generally useful WMSServer.  My plan for that is to have
a small set of classes that would allow a WMS Server to be easily
constructed from something as basic as Python's cgi library + GDAL.
This will take some time.

J.F., I know that you wanted to write some user docs before a first
release, but how about for now we focus on documentation in the code
and keep the user docs very simple?  I have picked up the DocBook
distribution.  Since you're using 4.1.2 with MapServer, would you
prefer to stay with that?  Any reason to go to 4.2?

Can we set a date for a code freeze and then a date for release?

Sean

Re: [Pyogclib-developers] Releasing pyogclib

[Jan-Oliver W. <ja...@in...>]

On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 08:29:55AM -0600, Sean Gillies wrote:
> The WMSClient module is ready to go.  Jan has said that he's already
> used it, and I'd like to release new versions of other software that
> would use the library.

I'd appreciate an early release.

BTW: Have you finally settled your mind regarding the license?

Best

	Jan

-- 
Jan-Oliver Wagner               http://intevation.de/~jan/

Intevation GmbH	              	     http://intevation.de/
FreeGIS	                               http://freegis.org/

Re: [Pyogclib-developers] Releasing pyogclib

[Sean G. <sgi...@fr...>]

On Thursday, October 2, 2003, at 09:37  AM, Jan-Oliver Wagner wrote:

> On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 08:29:55AM -0600, Sean Gillies wrote:
>> The WMSClient module is ready to go.  Jan has said that he's already
>> used it, and I'd like to release new versions of other software that
>> would use the library.
>
> I'd appreciate an early release.
>
> BTW: Have you finally settled your mind regarding the license?
>
> Best
>
> 	Jan
>

Jan, sorry I overlooked this email!

We'll stick with the current license.  I'm sympathetic to the GPL and 
LGPL
and it suits my _personal_ politics.  I consider myself to be at least 
two
standard deviations to the left of the US political center -- making me
only marginally left in Europe, eh? :)

However, I am stuck working in the US, and my clients are (presently) US
companies.  For the software that I am going to use in business, I 
think a
less political license is best.

I hope this choice won't prevent other developers from joining us.  The
Python programmer that J.F. and I are most interested on getting on
board to start is Frank Warmerdam, and he seems to be pretty satisfied
with the MIT-style license.

cheers,
Sean