I would say just continue on... as long as no actual functionality changes i don't see the need for an official review.
2c. -Justin On 4/30/10 8:50 AM, Andrea Aime wrote: > Jody Garnett ha scritto: >> As promised in my status update earlier in the week .... I am indeed >> causing trouble. Andrea asked me to pass on an "out of the pool" >> email while compile errors are fixed on geoserver trunk. >> >> So far the compile errors seem to be cases where geotools now expects >> a SimpleFeatureCollection to be provided; we should be able to tone >> that down a bit but need to hunt down the instances... > > Just a heads up to everybody. I made a local git branch to perform the > changes to SimpleFeatureCollection, SimpleFEatureSource and so on and... > the patch is a wopping 580KB already (I'm missing 5 classes that still > do not compile). > > The process followed so far was to do a search and replace of: > FeatureSource<SimpleFeatureType, SimpleFeature> -> SimpleFeatureSource > (the same for store and locking) > FeatureCollection<SimpleFeatureType, SimpleFeature> -> > SimplleFeatureCollection > FeatureIterator<SimpleFeature> -> SimpleFeatureIterator > > and then do a mass "organize imports" to fix all the missing imports. > I did not change the main GEoSErver feature source wrappers, those > are still generic. > Then hand fix what the above process did not fix already. > > None of the above changes makes GeoServer more married to simple > features that what it is already (afaik), but since we're talking > about a class and not about generics anymore it makes things a tad > more explicit, e.g., the compiler will not provide warning anymore, > but real compile rrors. E.g., in the code there was a ton of: > > FEatureCollection<SimpleFEatureType, SimpleFeature> coll = > (FeatureCollection) whatever; > > In retrospect I believe this makes it easier to spot the parts of > GeoServer that are actually complex feature ready. > > As you can imagine it makes for a lot of changes... and a massive patch > (the mass "organize imports" adds quite a bit of unrelated ones, but > at the same time going through all the files that were changed and > make a manual one was going to be crazy... in some places the > old imports are legitimate since the code was already complex feature > ready). > > At the same time, GS trunk is not building now. > > Does anyone want to suggest a different approach or review the patch? > > Cheers > Andrea > -- Justin Deoliveira OpenGeo - http://opengeo.org Enterprise support for open source geospatial. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Geoserver-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel
