Hi,
Here's how it would look like:
GT:
https://github.com/sampov2/geotools/commit/5b838eea027014c0149bea9015b5323118d389db
GS:
https://github.com/sampov2/geoserver/commit/a3013d12d9f72a3f95f4db2f7bf5f78a0a94b1b9
Sampo
On Mon, May 5, 2014 at 9:43 AM, Sampo Savolainen <
sampo.savolai...@spatineo.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 10:57 AM, Andrea Aime <
> andrea.a...@geo-solutions.it> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 8:44 AM, Sampo Savolainen <
>> sampo.savolai...@spatineo.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Andrea,
>>>
>>> Do you have any further thoughts on this or should I come up with
>>> another strategy for passing the configuration objects?
>>>
>>
>> Thanks for the diff. I believe it's ok... I have some generic concerns:
>> * passing the whole metadata map seems a bit excessive... but rolling a
>> way to fliter the good keys is probably
>> overdoing it... unless anybody else has ideas, I'm good with it
>>
> * from the point of view of GeoTools, there is no reason to have the map
>> point to Serializable, why not use
>> Object instead (the hint has to make sense in GeoTools without
>> factorying GeoServer in the picture)
>>
>
> I'll convert it to Object. I was just using the type of object that was
> available for a proof of concept.
>
>
>> * for the same reason above, I would use a key name other than
>> FEATURETYPEINFO_METADATA
>>
>> Just thinking out loud, another option could be to just merge the
>> metadata values into the query hints
>> map directly, not as a submap, every time a key in the metadata map
>> matches one of the Hints
>> well known values... that said, this would make it a bit restrictive,
>> which would bring us back to
>> some pluggable mechanism to list which hints should be merged... I'm
>> probably overthinking it.
>> Anyone else has opinions?
>>
>
> Merging the two maps but I can see at least two problems with that:
> - we lose the distinction between query hints and feature configuration
> - the keys are incompatible (RenderingHints$Key vs String)
>
> How about I create a new RenderingHints$Key implementation, say
> "ConfigurationMetadataKey" which wraps the featuretypeinfo metadata String
> keys. Then we could just merge the two maps into one?
>
>
> Sampo
>
>
> --
> Sampo Savolainen
> R&D Director, Spatineo Oy
> sampo.savolai...@spatineo.com
> +358-407555649
> Linnankoskenkatu 16 A 17, 00250 Helsinki, Finland
> www.spatineo.com, twitter.com/#!/spatineo
> www.linkedin.com/company/spatineo-inc
>
> This message may contain privileged and/or confidential information. If you
> have received this e-mail in error or are not the intended recipient, you
> may not use, copy, disseminate, or distribute it; do not open any
> attachments, delete it immediately from your system and notify the sender
> promptly by e-mail that you have done so.
>
--
Sampo Savolainen
R&D Director, Spatineo Oy
sampo.savolai...@spatineo.com
+358-407555649
Linnankoskenkatu 16 A 17, 00250 Helsinki, Finland
www.spatineo.com, twitter.com/#!/spatineo
www.linkedin.com/company/spatineo-inc
This message may contain privileged and/or confidential information. If you
have received this e-mail in error or are not the intended recipient, you
may not use, copy, disseminate, or distribute it; do not open any
attachments, delete it immediately from your system and notify the sender
promptly by e-mail that you have done so.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Is your legacy SCM system holding you back? Join Perforce May 7 to find out:
• 3 signs your SCM is hindering your productivity
• Requirements for releasing software faster
• Expert tips and advice for migrating your SCM now
http://p.sf.net/sfu/perforce
_______________________________________________
Geoserver-devel mailing list
Geoserver-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel
