Justin Deoliveira ha scritto: > The improvements sound really good to me. A big +1 on the work. However > does not work on this scale warrant a more official proposal? You bring > up the good point that there has been not much devel interest in KML > lately but I don't think that means it is fair game. Perhaps kml should > be moved to unsupported temporarily to open it up for more fluid > development? As of now though it is still part of the core and used > pretty widely and this is a pretty major change. Perhaps I am wrong though.
Existing code paths would not be touched, it would be a bit of glue in the reflector path to build network links straight to GWC, some code to check if the link makes sense (if the request can be passed down, if it's compatible) and a set of GUI elements to configure it. Hum.... right, I did not say I actually had no intention to do the same work in the "normal" KML GetMap requests. If we implement that in normal KML GetMap requests as well we need to add some glue there too. I don't expect this to grow the patch significantly though. Do you see this as major changes? Cheers Andrea -- Andrea Aime OpenGeo - http://opengeo.org Expert service straight from the developers. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Download Intel® Parallel Studio Eval Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance. See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev _______________________________________________ Geoserver-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel
