> > One thing that I also seemed to know about alphas are they are not > feature complete. And 2.0 is not, given that community schema is > not working right now. > > My vote is to call it still alpha. Also consider that we're > discussing switching from jdbc datastores to jdbc-ng ones > for this release, and the postgis-ng datastore has received > zero testing, solid, besides the unit test harness. > I don't think it even passes the cite tests (due to some > weird tests comparing dates with strings, but anyways). > If postgis-ng is the line that divides alpha from beta I would say let's keep postgis-ng in unsupported/incubation for a while longer. I know I just voiced a +1 for switching all to jdbc-ng but I think postgis is a special case due to the care and maintainence it has received over the years. While the performance issues can be addressed in the short term it will take us more than a few months imo to catch all the special cases that the current one does. I fear that if we put postgis-ng on the critical path to a beta release then we should not expect that beta any time soon. > Cheers > Andrea >
-- Justin Deoliveira OpenGeo - http://opengeo.org Enterprise support for open source geospatial. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ This SF.net email is sponsored by: High Quality Requirements in a Collaborative Environment. Download a free trial of Rational Requirements Composer Now! http://p.sf.net/sfu/www-ibm-com _______________________________________________ Geoserver-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel
