Well admittedly I don't have an understanding of the changes so maybe a 
proposal is pushing it. It was just the way it was described it made it 
seem like the changes were significant. And there was also the 
implication that since KML was not under active development lately that 
things could go ahead with no objection.

Anyways like I said, just my 2c as I don't have the same understanding 
of the changes. If you say the changes do not warrant a proposal then 
that is good enough for me :)

-Justin

On 3/9/10 9:20 AM, Andrea Aime wrote:
> 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
>
>


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

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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

Reply via email to