Re: RYA-179 Review License / Copyright notices on Rya Artifacts

Could we revive the indexer profile again? Make everything in indexing only included in that profile? That could push off refactoring the geoindexing until our next release. On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 10:29 AM, Aaron D. Mihalik wrote: > Yeah, that sounds possible. I

Re: RYA-179 Review License / Copyright notices on Rya Artifacts

I am seeing something happening might make this a non-issue in the medium term. Maybe someone can confirm this. It looks like the LocationTech community is adopting JTS and (here is my speculation) trying to shed GeoTools and any dependence on LGPL. "... induction of JTS

Re: RYA-179 Review License / Copyright notices on Rya Artifacts

Hi David, I'm involved with lots of things at LocationTech and the GeoTools/GeoServer community. JTS is close to get sorted out with a dual license. That said, GeoTools is still LGPL and will likely remain so for awhile. As far as I know, ESRI's Geometry library and JTS aren't immediately

Re: RYA-179 Review License / Copyright notices on Rya Artifacts

> Could we revive the indexer profile again? (tl;dr: Yes. Mentors: Please correct us if we're wrong) This might be a solution. I found a couple similar cases with Apache projects and discussions related to those cases. Apache Flink integrated with Amazon Kinesis [1] and [2]. Note that

Re: RYA-179 Review License / Copyright notices on Rya Artifacts

Oops, this thread was supposed to be subject RYA-177 RYA-179 is corrections to Rya source file license headers. Jim, do you know when GeoMesa plans to be completely free of GeoTools ? Clearly Geotools is an obstacle for Apache projects to use LocationTech projects, or at least GeoMesa. Or is

Re: RYA-179 Review License / Copyright notices on Rya Artifacts

Hi Dave, Good question. Currently, there are no plans for GeoMesa to be free of GeoTools. At the minute, GeoTools and GeoServer are two of the best projects for handling geospatial processing and serving up the results via OGC access patterns. It is inconvenient that their licenses aren't

Re: RYA-179 Review License / Copyright notices on Rya Artifacts

I would have said that this is only kosher when you have an alternative to the incompatibly licensed software. Is the indexer actually optional (I don't have enough context)? Are there ways for me to to indexing of the same type of data that don't require use of these incompatible

Re: [VOTE] Release Rya (Incubating) version 3.2.10

-1 because some test are failing and other issues I was able to build from source. Some test on Mongo took so long that I had to abort the build, so I ended up building with skipTests flag. Hashes are OK. I did not have time to check more. Several easy things to fix: 1) Release artifacts should

RE: RYA-179 Review License / Copyright notices on Rya Artifacts

While the indexer project extensions are optional in that they are turned off by default to minimize data plume, I would argue that they are not optional in the sense that Josh has described. There is no other way to index/query for freetext, geospatial, and temporal data without these

Re: RYA-179 Review License / Copyright notices on Rya Artifacts

The indexer project has a set of configurable optional extension to Rya. Things like support for geosparql, support for free text indexing, and support for precomputed joins (which is where the fluo integration comes in). These are extensions that by default are turned off. They can really