Thanks for the link to the PR Andrea (and the explanation of what is going
on here). I'll try and make some time to get that working with the current
geoserver.
Torben
On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 12:30 AM, Andrea Aime <[email protected]>
wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 12:23 AM, Torben Barsballe <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Given that all of the above is not actually valid according to the WFS
>> 2.0 specification (the propertyname parameter is not part of the 2.0 spec),
>> this is slightly less problematic. However since we still provide this
>> functionality, some amount of consistency would be good.
>> Given the errors observed when service=wfs is omitted, it might be best
>> to explicitly throw an error instead when service is not included in the
>> KVP.
>>
>
> We've been down this road already with the version number, also required,
> not mandated by GeoServer in its default configuration, and causing
> occasional failures
> in kvp parsing when omitted.
>
> I did not check, but I'd guess that service omission might be the same.
> Mandating it out of the box is a no go for simple backwards compatibility
> issues,
> and also because it is going to break existing endpoints like the wms
> reflector, kml reflector and animator which normally miss both service and
> version
> (incidentally, I'm also building the
> sort-of-rest-but-not-quite-and-more-kvp-like
> OpenSearch service on the same premise as the reflectors,
> that the service and method can be put in the path and version is not
> required).
>
> I've been down this road in the past for "version", what I found out is
> that the kvp parsing should have clear service and version before the
> kvpparsers are called, right
> now it's a mixed bag, kvp parser get what's in the kvp, if it's available,
> and then some code later figures out service and version if they were
> missing... but
> at that point the dispatcher might have used the wrong kvp parsers.
> I did prepare a pull request in my spare time to address this, but Justin
> requested me to run the cite tests offline and I never had time (or to be
> fair, the inclination
> to do so on a weekend);
>
> https://github.com/geoserver/geoserver/pull/574
>
> My take: if you want to try and resurrect that patch, align it with
> today's GeoServer, and make it built, I'd say go ahead and commit it on
> master,
> and we'll see what the ares CITE jobs think of it. Our CITE compliance is
> in quite some disarray anyways, it's not going to be a big deal if
> master is not compliant with our outdated version of the tests for a night
> or two imho
>
> Cheers
> Andrea
>
>
> --
> ==
> GeoServer Professional Services from the experts! Visit
> http://goo.gl/it488V for more information.
> ==
>
> Ing. Andrea Aime
> @geowolf
> Technical Lead
>
> GeoSolutions S.A.S.
> Via di Montramito 3/A
> 55054 Massarosa (LU)
> phone: +39 0584 962313 <+39%200584%20962313>
> fax: +39 0584 1660272 <+39%200584%20166%200272>
> mob: +39 339 8844549 <+39%20339%20884%204549>
>
> http://www.geo-solutions.it
> http://twitter.com/geosolutions_it
>
> *AVVERTENZE AI SENSI DEL D.Lgs. 196/2003*
>
> Le informazioni contenute in questo messaggio di posta elettronica e/o
> nel/i file/s allegato/i sono da considerarsi strettamente riservate. Il
> loro utilizzo è consentito esclusivamente al destinatario del messaggio,
> per le finalità indicate nel messaggio stesso. Qualora riceviate questo
> messaggio senza esserne il destinatario, Vi preghiamo cortesemente di
> darcene notizia via e-mail e di procedere alla distruzione del messaggio
> stesso, cancellandolo dal Vostro sistema. Conservare il messaggio stesso,
> divulgarlo anche in parte, distribuirlo ad altri soggetti, copiarlo, od
> utilizzarlo per finalità diverse, costituisce comportamento contrario ai
> principi dettati dal D.Lgs. 196/2003.
>
>
>
> The information in this message and/or attachments, is intended solely for
> the attention and use of the named addressee(s) and may be confidential or
> proprietary in nature or covered by the provisions of privacy act
> (Legislative Decree June, 30 2003, no.196 - Italy's New Data Protection
> Code).Any use not in accord with its purpose, any disclosure, reproduction,
> copying, distribution, or either dissemination, either whole or partial, is
> strictly forbidden except previous formal approval of the named
> addressee(s). If you are not the intended recipient, please contact
> immediately the sender by telephone, fax or e-mail and delete the
> information in this message that has been received in error. The sender
> does not give any warranty or accept liability as the content, accuracy or
> completeness of sent messages and accepts no responsibility for changes
> made after they were sent or for other risks which arise as a result of
> e-mail transmission, viruses, etc.
>
> -------------------------------------------------------
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Geoserver-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel
