Andrea you are correct; GeoAPI looks like it will be in a state of flux; 
we should watch a specific snashot for now; or tag the work.

Eclesia started looking at the SE1.1 specification which contains some 
additional functionality for Function (basically a default value if
an implementation of the function cannot be found).

Jody
> Martin Desruisseaux ha scritto:
>   
>> Its look like that a new method has been added in the Function interface 
>> (see attached diff), and GeoTools implementation do not yet implement it.
>>
>> Given that the documentation in the returns tag said "Optional", I 
>> assume that it is okay to just implement them as "return null" in GeoTools.
>>     
> Sigh, that's why I asked for a proposal for the geoapi stuff...
> this way you're going to break GT2 api without the proper process,
> which is not acceptable.
>
> For the moment, if you really need to hack GeoApi hard, can't we deploy
> a tagged release of geoapi and make geotools depend on that?
>
> Cheers
> Andrea
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference 
> Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. 
> Use priority code J8TL2D2. 
> http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone
> _______________________________________________
> Geotools-devel mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geotools-devel
>   


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference 
Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. 
Use priority code J8TL2D2. 
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone
_______________________________________________
Geotools-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geotools-devel

Reply via email to