Sure, go ahead and start a separate thread. Can I ask that for issues 
you find while hacking the community copy can you open jiras for me, as 
I do plan to incorporate all the changes you are making, just that I 
want them to go through the review process first.

-Justin

Daniele Romagnoli wrote:
> Being the RESTConfig community module no more used, we can remove it and 
> copy the modified restconfig in community. (do you think about a special 
> name to avoid confusion? some prefix/suffix?)
> I think the new restconfig has several improvements with respect to the 
> older one, therefore we prefer to use the last one.
> If we go in that direction, you can clean up the extension as you like.
> Let me know and I will open a new thread to request setting up a 
> community module.
> 
> Cheers,
> Daniele
> 
> 
> 
> On Fri, May 8, 2009 at 6:40 PM, Justin Deoliveira <[email protected] 
> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> 
>     Well actually thinking about it, the old RESTConfig community module
>     is still there, and all the classes are there pre-change. So you may
>     just be able to use it.
> 
>     My only hesitation is that we will end up in this same situation, a
>     bunch of work will be done there and it will not be ported properly
>     back to the extension. But since you guys are on a tight deadline we
>     don't have much choice.
> 
>     So proceed as you see fit, either create a new community module or
>     use the existing RESTConfig one.
> 
>     -Justin
> 
>     Daniele Romagnoli wrote:
> 
>         Hi,
>         while waiting for an improved catalog, as a quick workaround we
>         could set up a community module which is a "copy" of the actual
>         restconfig extension containing the workarounds.
>         (let's say, something similar to a branch, but restricted to a
>         single module).
> 
>         Does this sounds ok?
>         Daniele
> 
> 
> 
>         On Fri, May 8, 2009 at 6:16 PM, Simone Giannecchini
>         <[email protected]
>         <mailto:[email protected]>
>         <mailto:[email protected]
>         <mailto:[email protected]>>> wrote:
> 
>            Ciao Justin,
>            please, see below...
> 
> 
>            On Fri, May 8, 2009 at 6:10 PM, Justin Deoliveira
>            <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>         <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>> wrote:
>             >
>             >
>             > Simone Giannecchini wrote:
>             >>
>             >> Actually,
>             >> yeah, I have one objection.
>             >> Beside the fact that I am not so convinced that
>          separating the two
>             >> calls will make the api cleaner,
>             >
>             > I would argue it does from a REST perspective. Any parameters
>            that modify
>             > the resource being PUT should be in the request entity, not in
>            the URI that
>             > defines the resource.
>             >
>             >  I am quite worried that this would
>             >>
>             >> make the whole process much weaker. In the real world,
>         when you want
>             >> to add data in a dynamic way with a heavily loaded server
>         with the
>             >> current geoserver internal catalog it is not uncommon that
>            everything
>             >> breaks due to the fact that it takes quite some time to
>         persiste the
>             >> changes. You understand that starting to explode the
>         number of calls
>             >> to configure a single layer will not work in real use cases.
>             >
>             > I understand the issue, but I hope you can understand why I am
>            hesitant to
>             > make API compromises to get around limitations which are
>            currently just an
>             > implementation detail. Like if we had a catalog that performed
>            well under
>             > update this would be an non issue.
>             >
> 
>            I agree, but we don't have such a catalog yet :-).
> 
>             > Even in 2.0 this should be much less of an issue since now the
>            only thing
>             > that gets saved is what you modify. Should be much more
>            performant under
>             > heavy update load. That said I do realize that you are working
>            with 1.7.x
>             > and need to work stable.
>             >
>             > Putting the issue of the current catalog aside for the
>         moment, I
>            would
>             > speculate that the cost of a second call should be negligible
>            compared to
>             > the first. The reason being that since the first request
>         involves
>            a data
>             > upload it could potentially take a while assuming a decently
>            sized dataset.
>             > But the second call should always be constant time. So you
>         have 1
>             > potentially long request + 1 constant time (instantaneous
>         when we
>            have a
>             > decent catalog).
>             >
> 
>            I am talking about a different thing.
>            If you have 2000 coveragerages configured it takes a non
>         negligible
>            time to persist the config.
>            Do it twice is simply not acceptable.
> 
> 
> 
>             > That said, I would like to come up with a compromise here,
>         and I
>            would like
>             > to do so in a way that does not prevent you from meeting any
>            deadlines.
>             > Since the rest system is pluggable can we move the code that
>            contains these
>             > workarounds for our current catalog limitations into a
>         community
>            module.
>             > Doing so allows us to have a way to achieve the desired
>            functionality for
>             > now, but at the same time does not tie us to it for future
>            versions. And
>             > with a little spring magic we should be able to do in a
>         way that the
>             > community module version overrides the extension version
>         so there
>            are no URI
>             > conflicts.
> 
>            I'll live that to daniele, since we already modifying code
>         that worked
>            before 1.7.3, therefore there is not much time available for more
>            work.
> 
>            Simone.
>             >
>             > Thoughts?
>             >>
>             >>
>             >> Simone.
>             >> -------------------------------------------------------
>             >> Ing. Simone Giannecchini
>             >> GeoSolutions S.A.S.
>             >> Owner - Software Engineer
>             >> Via Carignoni 51
>             >> 55041  Camaiore (LU)
>             >> Italy
>             >>
>             >> phone: +39 0584983027
>             >> fax:      +39 0584983027
>             >> mob:    +39 333 8128928
>             >>
>             >>
>             >> http://www.geo-solutions.it
>             >> http://simboss.blogspot.com/
>             >> http://www.linkedin.com/in/simonegiannecchini
>             >>
>             >> -------------------------------------------------------
>             >>
>             >>
>             >>
>             >> On Fri, May 8, 2009 at 5:25 PM, Justin Deoliveira
>            <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>         <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>>
> 
>             >> wrote:
>             >>>
>             >>> For the first patch:
>             >>>
>             >>> +                final LayerInfo layerInfo;
>             >>> +                final Map<String,String>
>         layerProperties = new
>             >>> HashMap<String,String>(2);
>             >>> +                if (form.getFirst("style") != null)
>             >>> +                    layerProperties.put("style",
>             >>> form.getFirstValue("style"));
>             >>> +                if (form.getFirst("wmspath") != null)
>             >>> +                    layerProperties.put("path",
>             >>> form.getFirstValue("wmspath"));
>             >>> +                if (layerProperties.isEmpty())
>             >>> +                    layerInfo = builder.buildLayer(cinfo);
>             >>> +                else
>             >>> +                    layerInfo =
>             >>> builder.buildLayer(cinfo,layerProperties);
>             >>> +                catalog.add(layerInfo);
>             >>>
>             >>> I think this should be handled with a second call,
>         rather than
>            stack up
>             >>> available options. It makes the api cleaner imo. And is less
>            arbitrary.
>             >>> For instance why do we support style and wms path but
>         not the other
>             >>> properties?
>             >>>
>             >>> So I would prefer the interaction to be:
>             >>>
>             >>> 1) PUT to upload the coverage
>             >>> 2) PUT to modify the coverage
>             >>>
>             >>> Objections?
>             >>>
>             >>> Daniele Romagnoli wrote:
>             >>>>
>             >>>> Hi Justin,
>             >>>> I'm really sorry about this.
>             >>>> Next time I'll follows the steps you are talking about.
>             >>>> I was working on the coverages ingestion and I needed to
>            re-enable some
>             >>>> capabilities available in 1.7.2 for an urgent application.
>             >>>> I was too hasty. Sorry again.
>             >>>>
>             >>>>
>             >>>> On Fri, May 8, 2009 at 4:22 PM, Justin Deoliveira
>            <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>         <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
>             >>>> <mailto:[email protected]
>         <mailto:[email protected]> <mailto:[email protected]
>         <mailto:[email protected]>>>>
> 
>            wrote:
>             >>>>
>             >>>>    Reviewing the commits more closely I definitely have
>         a few
>            concerns
>             >>>>    which affirms my preference to have these changes
>         reviewed
>            before
>             >>>> hand.
>             >>>>
>             >>>>    * The method added to catalog builder seems
>         unnecessary to
>            me. I
>             >>>> think
>             >>>>    just the plain buildLayer can be called, and then
>         properties
>             >>>> overrideen
>             >>>>    after the fact, instead put putting them into a map and
>            passing it
>             >>>> into
>             >>>>    the method. It also does not sync up with any of the
>         other
>            methods in
>             >>>>    that class. I would like to keep that class as
>         consistent as
>             >>>> possible.
>             >>>>
>             >>>>    * You have made changes to api without any discussion.
>            Supporting
>             >>>>    wmspath and and style as query parameters is not
>         documented
>            as api
>             >>>>    options:
>             >>>>
>             >>>>
>             >>>>
>            
>         
> http://gridlock.openplans.org/geoserver/1.7.x/doc/user/extensions/rest/rest-config-api.html#coverage-stores
>             >>>>
>             >>>>
>             >>>> The previous RESTConfig allowed to handle them. I had
>         tought
>            during
>             >>>> migration to extensions they have been forgotten.
>             >>>>
>             >>>>
>             >>>>
>             >>>>
>            
>         
> <http://gridlock.openplans.org/geoserver/1.7.x/doc/user/extensions/rest/rest-config-api.html#coverage-stores>
>             >>>>
>             >>>>    Not saying we should not have them, but this is an
>            extension now, not
>             >>>> a
>             >>>>    community module anymore, such things require discussion
>            before hand.
>             >>>>
>             >>>>
>             >>>> You are Right.
>             >>>>
>             >>>>
>             >>>>
>             >>>>    * Many of the changes seem a bit arbitrary, changing
>         variable
>             >>>>    declarations to final for instance. Again, for
>         consistency
>            sake I
>             >>>> prefer
>             >>>>    that you delegate to how the rest of the class / method
>            does things
>             >>>> when
>             >>>>    making chagnes.
>             >>>>
>             >>>>    * Setting the layer name as the entity is again an api
>            change, and
>             >>>> one I
>             >>>>    don't agree with. It is more RESTful to set the
>         location of the
>             >>>> resource
>             >>>>    using the appropriate HTTP header, 'Location' like we do
>            for the POST
>             >>>>    case. Also, the indication of where the resource
>         should be
>            down with
>             >>>> a
>             >>>>    full uri, just returning the name assumes that URI's are
>            non-opaque,
>             >>>> ie
>             >>>>    the client has pre-knowledge of how URI's are built,
>         which
>            is another
>             >>>>    REST nono.
>             >>>>
>             >>>>
>             >>>> Do you think it would be better if I revert my changes?
>             >>>> Daniele
>             >>>>
>             >>>>
>             >>>>
>             >>>>
>             >>>>
>             >>>>    -Justin
>             >>>>
>             >>>>    Justin Deoliveira wrote:
>             >>>>     > Hi Daniele,
>             >>>>     >
>             >>>>     > I see you are making commits on 1.7.x to
>         restconfig and
>            main. I
>             >>>> would
>             >>>>     > appreciate posting patches for pre review first
>         before
>            committing.
>             >>>>     > Especially in this case where we have not yet
>         wrapped up
>             >>>> discussion
>             >>>>     > about how to handle the PUT issue from previous
>         email.
>             >>>>     >
>             >>>>     > I am not trying to hamper work here but I have been
>            deemed the
>             >>>>     > maintainer of that extension, and while there are no
>            hard rules
>             >>>>    in place
>             >>>>     > about who is allowed to commit, i would
>         appreciate being
>            to review
>             >>>>     > commits before they go through.
>             >>>>     >
>             >>>>     > -Justin
>             >>>>     >
>             >>>>
>             >>>>
>             >>>>    --
>             >>>>    Justin Deoliveira
>             >>>>    OpenGeo - http://opengeo.org
>             >>>>    Enterprise support for open source geospatial.
>             >>>>
>             >>>>
>             >>>>
>            
>         
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>             >>>>    The NEW KODAK i700 Series Scanners deliver under ANY
>            circumstances!
>             >>>> Your
>             >>>>    production scanning environment may not be a perfect
>         world
>            - but
>             >>>>    thanks to
>             >>>>    Kodak, there's a perfect scanner to get the job
>         done! With
>            the NEW
>             >>>>    KODAK i700
>             >>>>    Series Scanner you'll get full speed at 300 dpi even
>         with
>            all image
>             >>>>    processing features enabled.
>         http://p.sf.net/sfu/kodak-com
>             >>>>    _______________________________________________
>             >>>>    Geoserver-devel mailing list
>             >>>>    [email protected]
>         <mailto:[email protected]>
>            <mailto:[email protected]
>         <mailto:[email protected]>>
>             >>>>    <mailto:[email protected]
>         <mailto:[email protected]>
>            <mailto:[email protected]
>         <mailto:[email protected]>>>
>             >>>>  
>          https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel
>             >>>>
>             >>>>
>             >>>>
>             >>>>
>             >>>> --
>             >>>> -------------------------------------------------------
>             >>>> Eng. Daniele Romagnoli
>             >>>> Software Engineer
>             >>>>
>             >>>> GeoSolutions S.A.S.
>             >>>> Via Carignoni 51
>             >>>> 55041 Camaiore (LU)
>             >>>> Italy
>             >>>>
>             >>>> phone: +39 0584983027
>             >>>> fax:     +39 0584983027
>             >>>> mob:   +39 328 0559267
>             >>>>
>             >>>>
>             >>>> http://www.geo-solutions.it
>             >>>>
>             >>>> -------------------------------------------------------
>             >>>>
>             >>>>
>             >>>>
>          
>          
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>             >>>>
>             >>>>
>             >>>>
>          
>          
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>             >>>> The NEW KODAK i700 Series Scanners deliver under ANY
>            circumstances! Your
>             >>>> production scanning environment may not be a perfect
>         world -
>            but thanks
>             >>>> to
>             >>>> Kodak, there's a perfect scanner to get the job done!
>         With the
>            NEW KODAK
>             >>>> i700
>             >>>> Series Scanner you'll get full speed at 300 dpi even
>         with all
>            image
>             >>>> processing features enabled. http://p.sf.net/sfu/kodak-com
>             >>>>
>             >>>>
>             >>>>
>          
>          
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>             >>>>
>             >>>> _______________________________________________
>             >>>> Geoserver-devel mailing list
>             >>>> [email protected]
>         <mailto:[email protected]>
>            <mailto:[email protected]
>         <mailto:[email protected]>>
>             >>>>
>         https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel
>             >>>
>             >>> --
>             >>> Justin Deoliveira
>             >>> OpenGeo - http://opengeo.org
>             >>> Enterprise support for open source geospatial.
>             >>>
>             >>>
>             >>>
>          
>          
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>             >>> The NEW KODAK i700 Series Scanners deliver under ANY
>            circumstances! Your
>             >>> production scanning environment may not be a perfect world -
>            but thanks
>             >>> to
>             >>> Kodak, there's a perfect scanner to get the job done!
>         With the
>            NEW KODAK
>             >>> i700
>             >>> Series Scanner you'll get full speed at 300 dpi even
>         with all image
>             >>> processing features enabled. http://p.sf.net/sfu/kodak-com
>             >>> _______________________________________________
>             >>> Geoserver-devel mailing list
>             >>> [email protected]
>         <mailto:[email protected]>
>            <mailto:[email protected]
>         <mailto:[email protected]>>
>             >>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel
>             >>>
>             >
>             >
>             > --
>             > Justin Deoliveira
>             > OpenGeo - http://opengeo.org
>             > Enterprise support for open source geospatial.
>             >
> 
> 
> 
> 
>         -- 
>         -------------------------------------------------------
>         Eng. Daniele Romagnoli
>         Software Engineer
> 
>         GeoSolutions S.A.S.
>         Via Carignoni 51
>         55041 Camaiore (LU)
>         Italy
> 
>         phone: +39 0584983027
>         fax:     +39 0584983027
>         mob:   +39 328 0559267
> 
> 
>         http://www.geo-solutions.it
> 
>         -------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> 
>     -- 
>     Justin Deoliveira
>     OpenGeo - http://opengeo.org
>     Enterprise support for open source geospatial.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> -------------------------------------------------------
> Eng. Daniele Romagnoli
> Software Engineer
> 
> GeoSolutions S.A.S.
> Via Carignoni 51
> 55041 Camaiore (LU)
> Italy
> 
> phone: +39 0584983027
> fax:     +39 0584983027
> mob:   +39 328 0559267
> 
> 
> http://www.geo-solutions.it
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------
> 


-- 
Justin Deoliveira
OpenGeo - http://opengeo.org
Enterprise support for open source geospatial.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The NEW KODAK i700 Series Scanners deliver under ANY circumstances! Your
production scanning environment may not be a perfect world - but thanks to
Kodak, there's a perfect scanner to get the job done! With the NEW KODAK i700
Series Scanner you'll get full speed at 300 dpi even with all image 
processing features enabled. http://p.sf.net/sfu/kodak-com
_______________________________________________
Geoserver-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel

Reply via email to