GeoTools Project Status

Basics

Has the project been approved for incubation by the OSGeo board?

Yes

The GeoTools PMC have also accepted a proposal to Graduated from OSGeo (this page documents all internal communication on the subject)

Has an Incubation committee member been assigned as Mentor?

Yes, Frank Warmerdam was the assigned mentor, later replaced by Cameron Shorter.

Infrastructure Transition

Note, for each of the following it isn't necessary to move to foundation infrastructure, but if you aren't a reason should be provided.

Has the projectname.osgeo.org domain been populated with the projects web presence?

We are not willing to move away from Confluence, how may I update this page with a good link?

However, a web server may be of interest for hosting static HTML pages automatically generated like Maven reports and Javadoc.

We have several web pages:

• http://docs.codehaus.org/display/GEOTOOLS/Home
• http://docs.codehaus.org/display/GEOTDOC/Home
• http://docs.codehaus.org/display/GEOT/Home
• http://javadoc.geotools.fr/
• http://maven.geotools.fr/reports/ (this is the content that could move to an osgeo server)

Is the OSGeo bug tracker being used for the project?

No it is not, once again we have an existing bug tracker Jira which allows for collaboration with several other projects

• http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/GEOT

Is the OSGeo mailing list manager being used for the project?

Existing mailing list and archives are hosted by SF

• http://docs.codehaus.org/display/GEOTOOLS/Mailing+Lists

Is the OSGeo SVN or CVS system being used for the project?

Not at this time, moving our SVN would be of interest.

• http://svn.geotools.org/

Are binary and source downloads available from the OSGeo download area?

Binary, Source and Javadoc downloads are located on source forge. Binary and source downloads are also available in a maven repository (for live builds).

• https://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=4091&package_id=95639
• http://lists.refractions.net/m2/org/geotools/

The maven repository is also mirrored for Europe.

Community Functioning

Is there a functioning user support mechanisms (ie. mailing list)?

There is a active developers list and user list (http://docs.codehaus.org/display/GEOTOOLS/Mailing+Lists) weekly IRC chats (http://docs.codehaus.org/display/GEOT/3.1+Internet+Relay+Chat)

Are source and binary downloads for the package available?

Yes and we also have a javadoc (ie api) download see http://docs.codehaus.org/display/GEOTOOLS/Downloads

Has a Project Steering Committee been formed, and given control of the project?

Project has an exisiting Project Management Comittee see http://docs.codehaus.org/display/GEOT/4+Roles+and+Responsibilities

Does the Project Steering Committee have documentation on project procedures for PSC decisions, contributor guidelines, etc.

The project is well document here http://docs.codehaus.org/display/GEOT/Home

How many active developers are there? Are they from multiple organizations?

There are around 10 developers working on geotools as part of their day job, the expanded list goes up to around 30 with commit access. The important part is the number of responsible module maintainers. While the project is made up of individuals (who happen to work for organizations such as Penn State University, Refractions Research, The Open Planning Project, IBM, Oracle, Google others...)

Foundation Membership

Have project documents been updated to reflect membership in the foundation, and the relationship of the project to the foundation?

The home page has, and the formal developers guide has been updated to reflect new procedures (to reflect code contribution requirements)

Has an effort been made to brand the project web site with OSGeo foundation web styling and branding marks?

We are waiting until we have completed the incubation process

Code Copyright Review

Has a Code Provenance Review document been prepared for the project?

Jody Garnett has gone through each module and produced a review.txt file listing issues for the Module Maintainers to consider in 2006. Adrian Custer repeated this task in 2008 forming the final GeoTools Provenance Review page contains review.atp processed into the maven.geotools.gr website.

• GeoTools Provenance Review (GeoTools wiki)

Have issues raised in the provenance review been adequately addressed?

The most serious issues were handled with in a decisive and immediate manner:

• We removed ArcSDE and Oracle support from the library due to difficulties distribution the jars on which this functionality depended. In addition we shut off prior downloads of the library that contained this work. This functionality was restored after "stub jars" were created by hand (these jars are non functional; operating similar to a *C* header file allowing code to be compiled but not executed).
• Frank has helped address the concern of EPSG derrived data products, and we have had discussion on the integration of public domain code with our LGPL license requirements.
• All headers in the library were assigned to the "GeoTools PMC" - an entity with no legal existence. We arranged to transfer copyright to the OSGeo foundation.
• Remaining issues can be found in our issue tracker GeoTools License Issues. These issues range from checking where test case data originated from to questions about a few specific headers.

Have Contributor Agreements been Recieved

Yes, see Contributor_Agreements_Received. Our wiki documents all the developers we have contacted as part of this undertaking.