Andrea Aime wrote: > Jody Garnett ha scritto: >> Andrea Aime wrote: >>>> Fair enough Andrea; but this is the third implementation (GeoTools >>>> has throw out two already) - the only way I am going to get this >>>> documented to your satisfaction is to set uDig and GeoServer up to >>>> actually use it - and this is what is happening. >>> Nope... this is not going to happen until we are satisfied it's good. >>> Geoserver at the moment has no catalog usage whatsoever. >> Then why did Justin put it in? My understanding is your existing data >> modules (FeatureTypeInfo etc) have an implementation that implements >> these GeoTools interfaces. > > I can see usages of catalog stuff in the data module of geoserver 1.4.x, > but cannot see anything in geoserver actually using the data module. > So we're basically not using it? Eclipse tells me stuff like > DefaultGeoserverCatalog is used only by unit tests, and the catalog > interfaces are used a little in the Data class, but seems only > stored there... it's like an unfinished work. Yes it is unfinished... changing the rest of the GeoServer over to it was a pretty big change, and some issues came up. That coupled with changes in the sens project halted the work. > >>> Putting undocumented and untested stuff in main seems like a blitz to >>> me, not the proper way to do things in a community of peers. >> Justin moved quickly; and we were unable to review ourselves (it will be >> expensive for us to integrate this into uDig, but we figured since we >> could not give him the time of day when he needed it we have to take the >> pain). > > You're telling me uDig does not uses it? So it's not unit tested > nor real world tested??? The lack of unit testing is due to the fact that it is a direct port from udig, and since there was no unit tests to port from there ....
There are some docs lying around, but they arent too coherent yet. I would say the catalog on geotools is still in a pretty initial stage. I am using only for ows4 with Geoserver, and that work is still in a very R&D state. > >> All we can do is fix the policy that allowed this situation to occur: >> this is the motivation for the "unsupported" module system (ie GeoTools >> formally asks for documentation upfront before work is rolled into the >> core library). > > Hem... I see no catalog module in unsupported, in fact it's still there > in main even on trunk... If it makes people happy I would be happy to move the catalog to the unsupported space. -Justin > > Cheers > Andrea > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT > Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your > opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash > http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV > _______________________________________________ > Geotools-devel mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geotools-devel > > !DSPAM:1004,456de15110271995013331! > -- Justin Deoliveira [EMAIL PROTECTED] The Open Planning Project http://topp.openplans.org ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV _______________________________________________ Geotools-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geotools-devel
