Justin Deoliveira wrote: > Hi guys, > > I am looking over these interfaces and they seem to be an abstraction of > the datastore api. This is kind of out of left field if you ask me, > perhaps i missed discussion on the list about this. > Happened over a couple of meetings; posted a wiki page asking for feedback etc... > I see links to the catalog api, but none to the datastore api. Is there > a link? I realize there is a need to be a bit more abstract to handle > things like coverages, but an entirely new api? > This is where we were hoping for your comment Justin (well and simboss), you can make: - DataStore extends DataAccess - FeatureSource extends Source - FeatureStore extends Store
Do you want to do that now or later? I cannot see any advantage to doing it now (other then sanity check) since the benefit is in terms of making use of TypeName etc... problems we noticed with the FM branch. > Hate to say it guys, but this smells oddly like udig just dumping > interfaces into geotools. With a lack of documentation as it is I hardly > think that we need three new interfaces in a core module like api. > Has nothing to do with uDig; this is all about making sure we can run additional content (besides our broken feature model) through the system. Jody ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
