+1
And back porting sounds fine Justin, we also need to move the documentation
from the community section.
Jody Garnett
On Sat, Jan 18, 2014 at 6:12 AM, Justin Deoliveira <
jdeol...@boundlessgeo.com> wrote:
> Any objection to also moving the module to extensions on 2.4.x? Rationale
> being tha
+1
-Jukka Rahkonen-
Andrea Aime wrote:
Hi folks,
here is the official proposal:
http://geoserver.org/display/GEOS/GSIP+105+-+Promote+importer+module+to+extension+status
A dodgy bit how the coverage is calculated, but at the same time, the importer
is the sum of packages,
so I think it's fair t
+1 great progress being made here.
Notice: This email and any attachments are confidential.
If received in error please destroy and immediately notify us.
Do not copy or disclose the contents.
--
CenturyLink Cloud: The L
nice work guys :)
Regards,
Simone Giannecchini
==
Our support, Your Success! Visit http://opensdi.geo-solutions.it for more
information.
==
Ing. Simone Giannecchini
@simogeo
Founder/Director
GeoSolutions S.A.S.
Via Poggio alle Viti 1187
55054 Massarosa (LU)
Italy
phone: +39 0584 962313
fax:
On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 1:07 PM, Andrea Aime
wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 8:12 PM, Justin Deoliveira <
> jdeol...@boundlessgeo.com> wrote:
>
>> Any objection to also moving the module to extensions on 2.4.x? Rationale
>> being that I would like to continue to maintain the importer on 2.4.x as
On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 8:12 PM, Justin Deoliveira <
jdeol...@boundlessgeo.com> wrote:
> Any objection to also moving the module to extensions on 2.4.x? Rationale
> being that I would like to continue to maintain the importer on 2.4.x as
> well and would like to keep it in sync with all the fixes
if we do 2.5 I am +1 on doing the same for 2.4
Regards,
Simone Giannecchini
==
Our support, Your Success! Visit http://opensdi.geo-solutions.it for more
information.
==
Ing. Simone Giannecchini
@simogeo
Founder/Director
GeoSolutions S.A.S.
Via Poggio alle Viti 1187
55054 Massarosa (LU)
Italy
ph
Any objection to also moving the module to extensions on 2.4.x? Rationale
being that I would like to continue to maintain the importer on 2.4.x as
well and would like to keep it in sync with all the fixes and improvements
that will be implemented on 2.5.x. I am happy to do the move after this
propo
+1
On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 7:50 AM, Simone Giannecchini <
simone.giannecch...@geo-solutions.it> wrote:
> +0
>
> haven't had time to look into it yet.
>
> Regards,
> Simone Giannecchini
>
> ==
> Our support, Your Success! Visit http://opensdi.geo-solutions.it for more
> information.
> ==
>
> Ing.
+0
haven't had time to look into it yet.
Regards,
Simone Giannecchini
==
Our support, Your Success! Visit http://opensdi.geo-solutions.it for more
information.
==
Ing. Simone Giannecchini
@simogeo
Founder/Director
GeoSolutions S.A.S.
Via Poggio alle Viti 1187
55054 Massarosa (LU)
Italy
phone:
Absolutely +1
==
Our support, Your Success! Visit http://opensdi.geo-solutions.it for more
information.
==
Ing. Alessio Fabiani
@alfa7691
Founder/Technical Lead
GeoSolutions S.A.S.
Via Poggio alle Viti 1187
55054 Massarosa (LU)
Italy
phone: +39 0584 962313
fax: +39 0584 1660272
mob: +39
Hi folks,
here is the official proposal:
http://geoserver.org/display/GEOS/GSIP+105+-+Promote+importer+module+to+extension+status
A dodgy bit how the coverage is calculated, but at the same time, the
importer is the sum of packages,
so I think it's fair to compute a overall coverage, even if the c
12 matches
Mail list logo
