Hi Nick, > Yes that sounds like the best way to go about it, and I'd be happy to > implement > something. I'll have a look through the developers guide, if I can make a > decent > fix I might ask for commit privileges (or whatever the convention for > contributing > code is, I haven't read the guide yet!).
Cool ! That would be very much appreciated. Regarding commit access, we generally require people to have submitted a number of patches first as a way of them getting to know the project procedures, coding style etc and to establish trust and love with the developers. Moreover, in the case of a supported module, it's usually only the module maintainer who commits changes, reviews patches etc, even when the changes are authored by an existing GeoTools developer. I don't know how much coding you'll need to do to get this idea working, but if it turns out to be a big job then perhaps the best way to go about it would be as a series of patches which progressively build up a new visitor class plus unit test coverage, while leaving possible hacking of the graph classes themselves for later. But see what you think. Michael ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ All the data continuously generated in your IT infrastructure contains a definitive record of customers, application performance, security threats, fraudulent activity and more. Splunk takes this data and makes sense of it. Business sense. IT sense. Common sense. http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-d2d-oct _______________________________________________ Geotools-gt2-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geotools-gt2-users
