> > It's not about accepting your own pull request, what worries me most is
> > changes in the referencing module
> > which seem to be directed mostly by the haste of the moment than by a good
> > understanding of what
> > needs fixing and how.
> > Commits are also not directly related to the jiras being opened, for
> > example it's hard to tell what
> > happened with https://jira.codehaus.org/browse/GEOT-4286, has it been
> > reverted?
> > One final worry bit is that the changes to referencing do not seem to be
> > covered by their own tests
> >
> >
>
> +1. Seems like a faux paux to me to apply these pull requests without review
> from the module maintainer. Especially a module as core as referencing.
>
>
>
I applied a pull request to gt-wms, and was waiting for andrea on the one
involving gt-referencing, since he is busy I backed out those changes and made
a new pull request.
The "wish" for the change to ft-referencing still stands.
When working in the debugger with the various Envelope classes I would like to
know what CRS they are working with (even if it is just provided by CRS.toSRS
method).
Trying out that idea, shows two test cases are effected (they were checking
toSting output).
Would anyone else find this a good idea? I can make a separate pull request…
Jody
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Don't let slow site performance ruin your business. Deploy New Relic APM
Deploy New Relic app performance management and know exactly
what is happening inside your Ruby, Python, PHP, Java, and .NET app
Try New Relic at no cost today and get our sweet Data Nerd shirt too!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/newrelic-dev2dev
_______________________________________________
GeoTools-Devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geotools-devel
