[Users] GeoExt 1.0?

[Tim Schaub]

Chris Holmes wrote:
> What's on people's minds for the minimum component list that we need 
> before we call things '1.0'?
> 
> The list in my mind (past what's already in core, which I think gets us 
> much of the way there) is something like:
> 
> * Styling
> * Editing tools (with WFS-T and backed to other persistence formats)
> * Google Earth plugin
> * 'Search' - generic components, plus specific things for geocoding, 
> geonames, etc.
> * Printing
> * As easy to add google maps or bing through the UI as it is to add WMS 
> layers (or close to as easy, may have to include a key)
> 

I'm a bit late coming into this thread, but here's my opinion.  I'd be 
happy calling it 1.0 once we have solid Ext 3.x support.  I'd also like 
to do a review of the API and make sure we're happy with the names & 
patterns.

I think all ux (and stuff listed above) can come after.  1.0 doesn't 
mean "done" or in any way "complete" to me.  It just means "solid."

Tim

> I'm psyched on the other UX components, but I don't personally see them 
> as essential.  What is on other people's lists?  What makes GeoExt a 
> compelling mapping toolkit?
> 
> I think there will be a whole lot of interest once GeoExt gets past 1.0, 
> and it could be nice to define a roadmap / have an idea of what we're 
> shooting for.  Then once that core is reached effort should be shifted 
> from developing new components to getting what exists in to solid 1.0 
> state, with docs, examples etc.
> 
> C
> 


-- 
Tim Schaub
OpenGeo - http://opengeo.org
Expert service straight from the developers.