On Sun, 12 Jan 2020 at 23:38, Andrea Aime <andrea.a...@geo-solutions.it>
wrote:

> On Mon, Jan 13, 2020 at 8:22 AM Jody Garnett <jody.garn...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> I would like to propose MBStyle for graduation:
>>
>> Gold Star Plugin QA Test
>> <https://docs.geotools.org/latest/developer/procedures/check.html>:
>>
>>    - Module maintainer: Jody Garnett (GeoCat)
>>
>> So far I asked Torben to review the PRs, should I route the PR review
> requests to you then?
>

If Torben is in position to act as module maintainer also that would be
great.

>
>>    - Used in anger: shipped as part of boundless suite
>>
>> Hum... isn't the suite dead? Did it get some exposure?
>

Some.

That said, many of these are now closed, with a few PRs more and it will
> more or less translate decently the osm-bright-gl OMT
> <https://github.com/openmaptiles/osm-bright-gl-style> style. The other
> OMT styles
> <https://github.com/openmaptiles?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=gl-style&type=&language=>
> need some more work,
> if you want to play with them easily see this GeoServer data dir:
> https://github.com/geosolutions-it/openmaptiles (most of the issue now
> can be spotted by looking at the maps
> side by side with a Maputnik editor
> <https://maputnik.github.io/editor/#1/0/0>).
>

Thanks, that is good to know.

>
>>    - Optimized: non-performance critical code
>>    - Supported: community module documentation
>>    
>> <https://docs.geotools.org/latest/userguide/unsupported/mbstyle/index.html> 
>> has
>>    required code example, and a copy of the mapbox style specification
>>    indicating which aspects are implemented. I would like
>>
>> Additional:
>>
>>    - Developers guide: code has been consistently reviewed during
>>    development, subject to automated formatting and Andrea's recent QA safety
>>    measures
>>
>> I am finding some issues here (just trying to run a report to see JaCoCo
test coverage). Starting a PR here mbstyle review
<https://github.com/geotools/geotools/pull/2743>

>
>>    - Code Coverage: Getting "Skipping JaCoCo execution due to missing
>>    execution data file" any tips welcome
>>
>> IntelliJ reports a 87% coverage on the module, which is pretty good. (all
> of the issues I worked on either lacked a test or were testing for non
> compliant behavior).
>

Thanks, so far I have been unable to get JaCoCo to run (even though the
plugin is configured in our root pom). Does anyone have an example I can
add to the docs?

Cheers
Jody
_______________________________________________
GeoTools-Devel mailing list
GeoTools-Devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geotools-devel

Reply via email to