Jody Garnett ha scritto: > Hi Andrea: > > It has been a while since you first asked about this; my feedback is > to use Name (rather than a String) for consistency with everything > else; and to allow a bit of separation.
A bit of separation == namespacing? I can go for that. I have to see how that bridges with the WPS spec. I seem to remember the name of a process in the bindings is a CodeType. > I would not worry about bridging the new design with the old; so far > we have a udig community module and a geoserver community module to > update. I would rather update both then have two concepts around of > how to bundle up functionality. Mind, I won't update uDig, someone else will have to. GeoServer has already been updated in my chechkout. Bridging is very handy, the SingleProcessFactory removes lot of the boilerplate code you'd have to write when dealing with a factory that would emit a single process (check in every call if the name passed by the user is the expected one mainly). > Distraction: I seem to recall a version being listed at some point; > Simone had the need to hot deploy implementations; which trickled down > into visioning different implementations of the same functionality. I don't have any idea for this, SPI is pretty much limited in this respect, isn't it? I guess one could register a static factory that has its own internal dynamic mechanism thought. For example, something that watches a directory for Jython/Groovy/Scala scripts doing spatial analysis or something like that. Cheers Andrea -- Andrea Aime OpenGeo - http://opengeo.org Expert service straight from the developers. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Geotools-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geotools-devel
