Not sure i like the "compatability pack" idea Jody. I would rather keep them separate and orgranize by specification, especially since a lot of the implementations share code among versions. Not sure this will even work.
-Justin Jody Garnett wrote: > Andrea Aime wrote: >>> xml compatibility pack 1: >>> - filter1_0, sld1_0, gml2 >>> >>> xml compatibility pack 2: >>> - filter1_1, sld1_1, gml3 >>> >>> Would you consider that kind of thing sane? >> Apple and oranges? What xml parsers have to do with geometry >> wkt parsers? Oh,you're missing sld too, we have two of them (parsers). > Ha ha you got me :-) Okay I corrected the example above. > > The point was that we could both have a fewer number of jars to manage > by combining bindings > for specifications together into a couple of modules. > > Cheers, > Jody > >> 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:4007,46000d6e324461804284693! > -- Justin Deoliveira 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
