Working Group Minutes/EWG 2012-01-16


IRC nick Real name
Firefishy Grant Slater
migurski Michal Migurski
RichardF Richard Fairhurst
TomH Tom Hughes
zere Matt Amos


  • Discussion of RichardF's "Switch to OSM" site.
    • migurski asked if OSMF-US's new CDNned tile layer could be added.
  • Patch submission processes.
    • Preferred method should be to use the openstreetmap organisation on github, which allows use of pull requests and comments to manage the merge queue.
    • Need to document this and set ground rules for patch acceptability (tests, etc...) - zere to make a first pass.
  • TTT review
    • i18n for PL2 is done, but there's still some issues getting it hooked into translatewiki right.
    • Added migurski to the list of "people to talk to" for the clickable POIs task.
    • TomH encouraged zere to get the rest of the API calls done in cgimap.


18:01 < zere> minutes of the last meeting are up here:
18:02 < zere> please look them over and let me know if there's anything amiss
18:02 -!- migurski [] has joined #osm-ewg
18:03 < zere> morning, migurski - was just saying that the minutes are up and please let me know if there's anything wrong with them.
18:03 < migurski> morning!
18:07 < RichardF> looks good to me (but then I wasn't here)
18:07 < zere> items for consideration today: patch processes, TTT reviews, and anything anyone else wants to discuss :-)
18:07 < RichardF> might mention a certain new website as well ;)
18:08 < zere> yeah, that would be great if you're ready for making it a bit more public?
18:09 < migurski> new website? 
18:09 < zere> i'll let RichardF explain :-)
18:09 < RichardF> ok, shall I take that now?
18:10 < zere> sure. go for it.
18:10 < RichardF> ok. well, there's a lot of high-profile interest at the moment about switching from GMaps to OSM.
18:10 < RichardF> and the tools and data are both mature enough for people to seriously consider it, which is the point Ed Freyfogle made.
18:11 < RichardF> but the docs aren't great, especially if you're completely fresh to it.
18:11 < RichardF> so we've been working on a how-to guide:
18:11 < migurski> username/password?
18:11 < RichardF> http authed at the moment, but openstreetmap/m4pp1ng if you want to take a look.
18:11 < RichardF> (curse my slow fingers :) )
18:11 < migurski> it's fortuitous that I've spent the past few days hacking at a new version of Tile Drawer that's got a direct connection to geofabrik extracts
18:11 < RichardF> not quite finished - we're missing the OL page (I historically don't get on too well with OL)
18:11 < RichardF> ah!
18:12 < migurski> when are you thinking of launching? 
18:12 < RichardF> but comments and edits are very gratefully received - if anyone wants to create a login (it's WordPress) I can upgrade that to 'Editor'.
18:12 < RichardF> ideally this week. I'd like to capitalise on the momentum from the recent switches.
18:12 < migurski> that's awesome
18:12 < migurski> I better finish the TD update then =)
18:13 < RichardF> a lot of this really isn't my area of expertise, and all the rendering/serving docs are reformats of stuff from elsewhere. apmon (Kai) and Ian (Dees) have both said they'll take a look, but if there's anything you can do, go for it
18:13 < migurski> anything on here about supported tile layers?
18:13 < RichardF> in what way?
18:14 < migurski> OSM US recently set up a CDN for our server, and we'd like to be able to properly promise tiles for use
18:14 < migurski> in contrast to the main mapnik layer, which ends up getting used by 3rd parties and apps but is not sanctioned
18:14 < RichardF> oh, excellent. ok, then, there's a "free tiles" list at the bottom of the "Using tiles" page. At present it just has MQ Open ;)
18:14 < zere> the "providers" section lists some companies which will help with tile hosting / other stuff, too.
18:14 < RichardF> yep.
18:15 < migurski> this is great
18:16 < zere> hmm... could find some better images for the slideshow, though...
18:16 < TomH> I thought OSM US only had one server? 
18:16 < TomH> so what is this CDN built of ;-)
18:18 < RichardF> so, that's probably all I've got to say about this, but really - any contributions very warmly received. hope it'll go down well.
18:18 < migurski> CDN Is donated by
18:19 < migurski> Richard, I think it's awesome 
18:19 < RichardF> :)
18:21 < migurski> one content nit: under Using Tiles the only submenu is about Leaflet, but there's more on that page
18:21 < migurski> "Choosing an API/library" and "Choosing a tile provider"
18:22 < RichardF> yep. It's not entirely clear that the root page is the "Using Tiles" link itself (i.e. you can click the link as well as the subpages). Will see if I can bodge the template somehow
18:22 < migurski> right
18:22 < zere> the "getting started with leaflet" is a separate page with a small tutorial on leaflet. looks like RichardF was intending to write an OL one too ;-)
18:23 < RichardF> well, s/intending/trying to persuade someone else/ :)
18:23 < migurski> heh
18:23 < RichardF> OL really really not my area of expertise. But Ian's said he'll take a look at it.
18:23 < RichardF> if all else fails I'll just copy/paste something off the wiki.
18:26 < zere> next item was the patch process, if there's nothing further on S2O immediately?
18:28 < zere> the question here is: would there be a benefit to having a more concrete process for handling patches? at the moment it's pretty ad-hoc, and there are some advantages to that.
18:29 < TomH> other than documenting a specific way to submit them, what did you have in mind?
18:29 < zere> but there are some disadvantages to it too, particularly if the number of contributions rises.
18:30 < zere> it could be that - that there's a small number of well-documented ways to submit patches and get feedback if they're not immediately suitable.
18:30 -!- Firefishy [] has joined #osm-ewg
18:31 < TomH> feedback is the big problem in my mind, but I don't really have a solution for it other than trying to force myself to do things better ;-)
18:31 < zere> evening, Firefishy :-)
18:31  * Firefishy put a permanent reminder in...
18:31 < Firefishy> Evening.
18:31 < zere> i don't know who runs the openstreetmap organisation on github, but is it worth pulling all (or almost all) patches through that?
18:32 < zere> and being able to make use of the pull request comments system?
18:32 < TomH> I have access to it
18:33 < TomH> yes trying to use pull comments, and line by line comments for large patches may help
18:33  * migurski steps out for a moment to get coffee
18:34 < TomH> though I tend to review in a side by side visual diff tool for big patches rather than the online diff
18:34 < zere> can't github do that too?
18:34 < TomH> no idea
18:34 < TomH> maybe
18:34 < TomH> main issue is to try and make myself give feedback rather than just fi things myself 
18:35 < TomH> so that people learn
18:35 < zere> is it worth putting in writing a set of recommendations for patch submitters - comments, tests, code style, etc...?
18:35 < TomH> that would certainly be an idea
18:35 < RichardF> (my poor beloved tabs)
18:36 < zere> well, whitespace is easy (but annoying) to fix when applying the patch. but it's more things like naming conventions
18:36  * RichardF nods
18:36 < zere> not calling ruby methods someThingInCamelCase, for example.
18:37 < TomH> to be fair I don't remember ever getting a patch that breaks naming conventions
18:37 < zere> although, functionally, the important parts are generally that there's sufficient (automatic) testing.
18:39 < RichardF> migurski: superb, thank you!
18:39 < zere> TomH: is there anything other than comments, tests and code style that you can think of that would be good to go in such a document?
18:40 < TomH> well we can always add more stuff as we think of it
18:40 < TomH> being "idiotmatic rails" but that's a bit hard to explain ;-)
18:40 < zere> yup. would you like to draft it, or shall i?
18:40 < TomH> plus lots of our current code may not be idiotmatic by current standards
18:40 < TomH> you do it and I can chip in 
18:41 < TomH> you going to do it on the wiki?
18:41 < zere> i think the natural place for such a document is a CONTRIBUTING file in the source code. or a section in the readme.
18:41 < zere> but it could be duplicated on the wiki too.
18:41 < TomH> well might be good so github displays it
18:42 < zere> yup, will do.
18:44 < zere> another item is reviewing the TTTs. when we put them up we said we'd review them regularly, and i'm keen to do that, even if there hasn't been much time for progress to date.
18:44 < zere> for reference
18:45 < zere> TomH: anything of note on the OSB/notes branch?
18:45 < TomH> oh I move it rails 3 weekend before last and started sorting out the work I defered before
18:46 < TomH> hopefully I'll be able to push it soon and let people see where we're at
18:47  * migurski returns just in time
18:47 < zere> TomH: cool :-) i've just added a note to that effect on the "progress" page.
18:48 < zere> RichardF: anything new happened with tutorial mode?
18:48 < RichardF> zere: nope, afraid not
18:48 < zere> no worries.
18:49 < zere> the i18n for PL2 was completed. do we want to make some sort of announcement of that (even if it was sort-of already done)? and pull something off the backlog in its place?
18:50 < RichardF> yep, coupled with a "so get translating!" announcement?
18:51 < TomH> RichardF: are you going to reply to that email from Siebrand?
18:51 < RichardF> TomH: I can do. It's nothing I really know about but they seem to be standard properties files?
18:52 < TomH> well it's more about working out how he's going to provide the translations back to you
18:52 < TomH> I think he may be right that they are java style property files
18:52 < RichardF> they look like it
18:52 < TomH> he wants to just commit them to your github tree
18:52 < TomH> but wasn't sure if you waould want that
18:53 < RichardF> it seems reasonable if they're just in the locales directory. can I set github up to automatically accept anything he throws there?
18:54 < TomH> should be able to I think
18:54 < RichardF> ok. I'll drop him a line.
18:55 < TomH> use the "Admin" button at the top and then the "Collaborators" ab
18:56 < TomH> hmm not sure if a free acount can do it though
18:56 < RichardF> it's let me add him.
18:56 < TomH> yes it let me add you
18:57 < TomH> it was the "0/0" thing that confused me
18:59 < zere> i'll ask ris and frederik offline whether there's anything they want to add to their respective progress pages for i18n on and odbl migration tools.
19:01 < zere> migurski: i'd like to mention that you're interested in the clickable stuff as well. would you mind if i added you in the "who can you talk to" section?
19:01 < migurski> yes, please!
19:02 < migurski> I've not actually made any measurable progress on it since last week.
19:03 < zere> no worries. i've not made any since november ;-)
19:04 < zere> but i thought it would be useful to collect the interested parties together in case someone else is interested and wants to collaborate.
19:05  * TomH wonders how finishing off the cgimap enhancements managed not to make it to the top 10 ;-)
19:06 < zere> well, what do you mean by "finishing off"?
19:06 < zere> i.e: how complete does it have to be?
19:08 < zere> on the other two items i'm PoC for (deleted items, owl-powered history tab) i have to also say there's nothing of significance to report.
19:09 < zere> if apmon's here at the next meeting then we can catch up with the other tasks then.
19:10 < TomH> zere: well that's the point - if we have extra calls implemented I would be all for deploying them rather than hanging on for some wishful target of having everything
19:11 < zere> ok. i'll take stock of what's available. knock off any rough edges. i keep meaning to write some tests, too...
19:12 < zere> and, of course, merge it back into master.
19:13 < zere> i was doing a bit of work a couple of weeks back with the read-only postgres stuff. but now i can't remember what state i left it in.
19:13 < zere> has anyone got anything else they would like to discuss?
19:14 < TomH> don't think so
19:15 < zere> great! thanks to everyone for attending, and i hope to see you next time. :-)