Geometry Boost List: [ggl] A few more thoughts about infrastructure

Subject: [ggl] A few more thoughts about infrastructure
From: Mateusz Loskot (mateusz)
Date: 2010-03-09 20:41:06

Barend Gehrels wrote:
>> It may be interesting in terms of our recent talks about Boost
>> Geometry infrastructure, where to place things like bug tracer,
>> mailing list, wiki, website and not to make the project scattered
>> too much as it would likely make thinks very confusing to users and
>> developers too.
> 
> My opinion is to move to Boost as much as possible, to avoid
> scattering.

I second your opinion too.

> So SVN is already there, including Trac. So tickets can be made there
> as well.

Yes.

> Wiki is there and the current pages can be moved too.

Yes, easily.

> Is current left the mailing list (@osgeo) and the website (@geodan).
> The website_at_geodan can forward to the documentation at Boost, as soon
> as the library is incorporated. Until that moment it can stay as it
> is now, or even updated if necessary (note that it is often cited by
> Google).

It's all right.

> The mailing list, yes, it is logical to move it to Boost as well, as
> a project-specific mailing lists.

Sounds logical to me too.

> However, I'm doubing about this one because it is currently working
> very well and I'm thankful that osgeo is hosting this. There are
> currently 43 people subscribed. If we stay here, we stay close (or
> closer) to the osgeo community which can have advantages as well....

It's a good point. However, I see potential problems, I in longer term:
1) Name GGL is (or will become) less relevant to the actual project what
may be confusing
2) If name will not match, and location (away of Boost) will not match,
it may cause even more confusions.

Perhaps, we could stay with the least where we are to not to make too
much moves at once and make a move when along with first release of the
library with Boost. That will be a good time to officially announce
where to find all the puzzles of the project, etc.

It would give us time to collect more comments and reconsider all pros
and cons, without rush.

> Any more opinions on this?

I'm hoping to hear more votes too.

Best regards,
-- 
Mateusz Loskot, http://mateusz.loskot.net
Charter Member of OSGeo, http://osgeo.org