Working Group Minutes/EWG 2013-04-22

From OpenStreetMap Foundation


IRC nick Real name
apmon Kai Krueger
TomH Tom Hughes
zere Matt Amos


  • Notes branch
    • Likely will be merged later this week.
  • Osm2pgsql
    • Long-lines patch merged, should mitigate rendering issues with extremely long ways.
    • Start with improving the README for rails_port.
    • No suggestions on where to start with the improvements.


17:05:43 <zere> minutes of the last meeting:
17:06:19 <zere> leftover action: pnorman, any news on the benchmarking of the carto style?
17:09:25 <zere> i guess he's afk.
17:09:54 <zere> TomH: any news on the notes branch merge?
17:10:22 <TomH> will probably do it this week I guess
17:11:28 <zere> cool.
17:11:47 <zere> there's nothing else on the agenda. would anyone like to discuss anything else?
17:12:52 <apmon> What is next?
17:13:35 <apmon> Are we still aiming to work on the top ten tasks?
17:14:09 <apmon> Now that the notes task is (nearly) finished, which task should be tackled next?
17:14:45 <apmon> btw, just for the record, zere, I have merged your patch for the long lines in osm2pgsql
17:15:15 <zere> apmon: yup, i got the notification. thanks :-)
17:16:14 <zere> ok, so the plan doesn't call for targetting the TTTs - but we are targetting better documentation, more developer events, and making issue tracker information more widely available
17:17:54 <zere> given that the plan hasn't technically been approved yet, seems like it might be best to start on documentation.
17:18:24 <zere> do we have any volunteers to look at READMEs - particularly on the rails_port, but elsewhere as well, to get started on some improvements?
17:19:17 <apmon> One question would be if we want to go the route of a wiki, or documentation with limited commit access, like READMEs in the repository or switch2osm
17:20:57 <apmon> Is the rails_port documentation actually broken?
17:21:24 <zere> the READMEs in the source code were highlighted as needing work. seems to me that making them better works much better than linking to a wiki or switch2osm because they're bundled with the source code.
17:22:10 <zere> having the bulk of the documentation somewhere else may make sense, but i think the README needs to be the first place we improve.
17:23:55 <apmon> seems reasonably accurate to me on first glance
17:24:10 <apmon> although the actual documentation of how to install simply links to the wiki page of rails port
17:24:21 <zere> i don't think it's incorrect. i think the criticism of it is that it's not particularly helpful ;-)
17:25:02 <zere> perhaps needs to include more introductory information - be laid out better, and so forth
17:26:45 <apmon> perhaps we should collect some bulletpoints of what information is lacking or non-helpful
17:27:22 <apmon> best would be to get feedback from new people who were trying to use the documentation and failed. What exactly was unclear or mising
17:30:50 <zere> ok. i think what's missing is: the description is too reliant on jargon - it needs to be rewritten to be more accessible to explain what these terms of jargon are.
17:31:25 <zere> it should include installation instructions, even very brief ones, with a link somewhere else for more detailed ones.
17:32:18 <zere> there needs to be somewhere where it talks about where to find various bits of the code - it's a pretty standard rails layout, but some "high level" description would help people find stuff.
17:33:09 <zere> tmcw: any specific points on what needs to be improved in the README?
17:39:22 <zere> apparently not.
17:39:32 <zere> how do we get started with this?
17:57:59 <zere> i guess we can discuss this next time.
17:58:16 <zere> thanks for coming!