Re: [Geoserver-devel] GSIP-136 Resource Notification Dispatcher

Ops, yes, of course! +1 Cheers Andrea On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 10:43 AM, Niels Charlier wrote: > So, if that has been fixed does that mean we can get an additional +1? > > :) > > > On 31-01-16 19:18, Jody Garnett wrote: > > Right, I can delete the "listen to root" idea. I had the idea that we >

Re: [Geoserver-devel] GSIP-136 Resource Notification Dispatcher

So, if that has been fixed does that mean we can get an additional +1? :) On 31-01-16 19:18, Jody Garnett wrote: Right, I can delete the "listen to root" idea. I had the idea that we could listen to the root folder (as an alternative to this proposal) and be advised of all resource changes.

Re: [Geoserver-devel] GSIP-136 Resource Notification Dispatcher

Right, I can delete the "listen to root" idea. I had the idea that we could listen to the root folder (as an alternative to this proposal) and be advised of all resource changes. Turns out listening to a directory - only gives you updates to the files listed in the directory - but does not do recu

Re: [Geoserver-devel] GSIP-136 Resource Notification Dispatcher

On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 2:05 AM, Jody Garnett wrote: > Catching email list up on sprint discussion :) This conversation has > settled down and I will update the proposal and ask for a second review. > > The take home message is: > > - Watching resources change (on the file system or in jdbc resou

Re: [Geoserver-devel] GSIP-136 Resource Notification Dispatcher

Changes look fine.  Still +1. --   Kevin Michael Smith   smit...@draconic.ca On Tue, Jan 19, 2016, at 05:05 PM, Jody Garnett wrote: > Catching email list up on sprint discussion :) This conversation has settled > down and I will update the proposal and ask for a second review. > > The take

Re: [Geoserver-devel] GSIP-136 Resource Notification Dispatcher

Catching email list up on sprint discussion :) This conversation has settled down and I will update the proposal and ask for a second review. The take home message is: - Watching resources change (on the file system or in jdbc resource store) is different from broadcasting the change to listeners

Re: [Geoserver-devel] GSIP-136 Resource Notification Dispatcher

This change is fine by me, my original idea was to keep the API as unaffected as possible and keep the dispatcher something running in the background, optionally. But - that means that the FileSystemRS also will need a ResourceNotificationDispatcher. The FileSystemWatcher almost implements it

Re: [Geoserver-devel] GSIP-136 Resource Notification Dispatcher

Thanks Ben, I'll make a new PR as soon as we figured out the proposal Cheers Niels On 01/17/2016 06:18 PM, Ben Caradoc-Davies wrote: > And it might be best to clean up after me by cherry-picking the two > commits that were left on PR #1361 (with GSIP-136 in their title) onto > master. > https://g

Re: [Geoserver-devel] GSIP-136 Resource Notification Dispatcher

And it might be best to clean up after me by cherry-picking the two commits that were left on PR #1361 (with GSIP-136 in their title) onto master. https://github.com/NielsCharlier/geoserver/commit/c28e8ddbbbaaa19ec697210ae6da696877e9af1d https://github.com/NielsCharlier/geoserver/commit/0219db6e7

Re: [Geoserver-devel] GSIP-136 Resource Notification Dispatcher

Niels - do you mind if I gather up the result of this email thread and update the proposal - or would you like to? On Sun, Jan 17, 2016 at 4:05 PM Ben Caradoc-Davies wrote: > Sorry, yes it was, be me. I mistakenly assumed that all the GSIP-136 > changes were isolated to the last two commits of PR

Re: [Geoserver-devel] GSIP-136 Resource Notification Dispatcher

Sorry, yes it was, be me. I mistakenly assumed that all the GSIP-136 changes were isolated to the last two commits of PR #1361, but the addition of this interface and the implementation SimpleResourceNotificationDispatcher were included in an earlier commit. We will need to refactor it to match

Re: [Geoserver-devel] GSIP-136 Resource Notification Dispatcher

Ben I noticed ResourceNotificationDispatcher is now available on master - was that accidentally merged? -- Jody Garnett On 17 January 2016 at 14:01,

Re: [Geoserver-devel] GSIP-136 Resource Notification Dispatcher

Agreed, proposal is a tool for discussion and resolution. Java7FileWatcher - yeah we upgraded to Java 7 right as the ResourceStore API was being written so I made the internal FileWatcher class compatible - so if it listens to things a directory at a time that is probably what I did as well: Reso

Re: [Geoserver-devel] GSIP-136 Resource Notification Dispatcher

On 18/01/16 10:54, Andrea Aime wrote: > Sorry it's not a +1 yet, at the moment the proposal is leaving me with > questions :-) Thanks very much, Andrea. Your questions are much more useful than any vote! Kind regards, -- Ben Caradoc-Davies Director Transient Software Limited

Re: [Geoserver-devel] GSIP-136 Resource Notification Dispatcher

Hi Jody, I've just had a quick conversation with you about the proposal and we discussed it, now I'm sharing my feedback with the rest of the community. Personally, I find it redundant that there is and add/remove listener method in both the resource and the store, given that the Resource can be c

Re: [Geoserver-devel] GSIP-136 Resource Notification Dispatcher

Hi Ian, my take on the 0 vote was the same, I just had no time to look into it and did not want to block it. However, there is something to be said about a proposal that is not getting anybody's attention... I see it as a red flag, maybe it's about something that did not deserve a proposal, or mayb

Re: [Geoserver-devel] GSIP-136 Resource Notification Dispatcher

I agree with Ben, when I voted 0 it was simply to indicate I was aware of the GISP but was busy all week with work and so couldn't review it and didn't want to hold things up. I confess I hadn't read the GeoServer voting rules and assumed they were the same as the GeoTools rules. Had I realised tha

Re: [Geoserver-devel] GSIP-136 Resource Notification Dispatcher

Niels, our voting procedure makes no sense to me. The perverse outcome in this vote has made that clear to me. I would like to change our voting procedure to require three +1 votes and no -1 votes for a GSIP to succeed. That should have a similar effect to requiring a quorum and a simple major

Re: [Geoserver-devel] GSIP-136 Resource Notification Dispatcher

Does it make sense that the proposal gets rejected with only +1 and 0 votes? If people are saying 0 it means that they don't particularly care one way or the other. Normally in elections, parliaments and referenda you only need half of the non-neutral votes, with a minimum participation thresho

Re: [Geoserver-devel] GSIP-136 Resource Notification Dispatcher

Jody, your ROOT ResourceListener Alternative would work but could unnecessary notifications. I think your original proposal is superior. I also have a new question about your original proposal: Would Resource.getListeners and Resource.removeAllListeners help discover and manage listeners from

Re: [Geoserver-devel] GSIP-136 Resource Notification Dispatcher

50% is not a majority. Several PSC members requested more time, so perhaps voting should be deferred for a week or so? If one 0-voter changes their vote to +1, the GSIP is successful. On 16/01/16 10:26, Jody Garnett wrote: > I also note that Simone has not responded yet, if he votes +1 Ben will

Re: [Geoserver-devel] GSIP-136 Resource Notification Dispatcher

This is a bit awkward as process is rejecting the proposal due to lack of participation, leaving a rejected proposal and no clear way forward. We could take that the proposal was not sufficiently clear (ie quick to read) and revise and submit again ... but I am really not interested in running aro

Re: [Geoserver-devel] GSIP-136 Resource Notification Dispatcher

Jody, I also like +0/-0, but I think that these votes should be counted as the same. As the PSC has grown (in terms of active members), was it our intent that we need more +1 votes to accept a GSIP to reach a majority? One consequence is that this GSIP was in effect rejected by the 0 votes of

Re: [Geoserver-devel] GSIP-136 Resource Notification Dispatcher

I do not want to get too hung up on words, the quick take is the PSC does not have enough capacity to review the proposal at the moment so we should wait. The GeoServer process does not have a time limit like the GeoTools one. I like +0 and -0 as that provides a way for people who have not had tim

Re: [Geoserver-devel] GSIP-136 Resource Notification Dispatcher

; > jody.garn...@gmail.com>; Geoserver Developers < > geoserver-devel@lists.sourceforge.net> > Subject: Re: [Geoserver-devel] GSIP-136 Resource Notification Dispatcher > > I consider that +0 votes are positive. > > -Jukka- > > > > -Alkuperäinen viesti- > Lähettäjä:

Re: [Geoserver-devel] GSIP-136 Resource Notification Dispatcher

6 Resource Notification Dispatcher I consider that +0 votes are positive. -Jukka- -Alkuperäinen viesti- Lähettäjä: Ben Caradoc-Davies [mailto:b...@transient.nz] Lähetetty: 14. tammikuuta 2016 23:08 Vastaanottaja: Jody Garnett; Geoserver Developers Aihe: Re: [Geoserver-devel] GSIP-13

Re: [Geoserver-devel] GSIP-136 Resource Notification Dispatcher

Chris, the PSC page (which differs from the GSIP page) lists: http://docs.geoserver.org/latest/en/developer/policies/psc.html +1 : For -1 : Against +0: Mildly for, but mostly indifferent -0: Mildly against, but mostly indifferent What is unclear is whether +0 is considered po

Re: [Geoserver-devel] GSIP-136 Resource Notification Dispatcher

en viesti- > Lähettäjä: Ben Caradoc-Davies [mailto:b...@transient.nz] > Lähetetty: 14. tammikuuta 2016 23:08 > Vastaanottaja: Jody Garnett; Geoserver Developers > Aihe: Re: [Geoserver-devel] GSIP-136 Resource Notification Dispatcher > > Jody, > > GSIP-136 now has 4 "+1&q

Re: [Geoserver-devel] GSIP-136 Resource Notification Dispatcher

I consider that +0 votes are positive. -Jukka- -Alkuperäinen viesti- Lähettäjä: Ben Caradoc-Davies [mailto:b...@transient.nz] Lähetetty: 14. tammikuuta 2016 23:08 Vastaanottaja: Jody Garnett; Geoserver Developers Aihe: Re: [Geoserver-devel] GSIP-136 Resource Notification Dispatcher

Re: [Geoserver-devel] GSIP-136 Resource Notification Dispatcher

Jody, GSIP-136 now has 4 "+1" votes and 5 "0" votes, so according to the GSIP procedure, has been rejected: "The proposal is considered successful after a majority of positive votes is a achieved". Kind regards, Ben. On 14/01/16 08:40, Jody Garnett wrote: > https://github.com/geoserver/geoserv

Re: [Geoserver-devel] GSIP-136 Resource Notification Dispatcher

+0 Goes beyond my capacity but I believe that the intention is good. -Jukka- Lähettäjä: Christian Mueller [mailto:christian.muel...@os-solutions.at] Lähetetty: 14. tammikuuta 2016 11:45 Vastaanottaja: Andrea Aime Kopio: Geoserver-devel; Ian Turton Aihe: Re: [Geoserver-devel] GSIP-136 Resource

Re: [Geoserver-devel] GSIP-136 Resource Notification Dispatcher

0 No time to review Christian On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 10:32 AM, Andrea Aime wrote: > On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 8:30 AM, Ian Turton wrote: > >> I'm 0 as I don't have time to review this week. >> > > Likewise > > Cheers > Andrea > > > -- > == > GeoServer Professional Services from the experts! Vi

Re: [Geoserver-devel] GSIP-136 Resource Notification Dispatcher

On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 8:30 AM, Ian Turton wrote: > I'm 0 as I don't have time to review this week. > Likewise Cheers Andrea -- == GeoServer Professional Services from the experts! Visit http://goo.gl/it488V for more information. == Ing. Andrea Aime @geowolf Technical Lead GeoSolutions S.

Re: [Geoserver-devel] GSIP-136 Resource Notification Dispatcher

+0 == GeoServer Professional Services from the experts! Visit http://goo.gl/NWWaa2 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

Re: [Geoserver-devel] GSIP-136 Resource Notification Dispatcher

I'm 0 as I don't have time to review this week. Ian On 13 Jan 2016 19:42, "Jody Garnett" wrote: > Follow up to meeting "final call" for feedback: > > https://github.com/geoserver/geoserver/wiki/GSIP-136 > > Project Steering Committee: > >- Alessio Fabiani >- Andrea Aime >- Ben Carado

Re: [Geoserver-devel] GSIP-136 Resource Notification Dispatcher

Follow up to meeting "final call" for feedback: https://github.com/geoserver/geoserver/wiki/GSIP-136 Project Steering Committee: - Alessio Fabiani - Andrea Aime - Ben Caradoc-Davies: +1 - Christian Mueller - Ian Turton - Jody Garnett +1 - Jukka Rahkonen - Kevin Smith: +1

Re: [Geoserver-devel] GSIP-136 Resource Notification Dispatcher

On 2016-01-06 06:46 PM, Jody Garnett wrote: > This is a follow up to pull request #1361 > introducing some > new public API: > > https://github.com/geoserver/geoserver/wiki/GSIP-136 > Looks reasonable. +1 -- Kevin Michael Smith signature.as

Re: [Geoserver-devel] GSIP-136 Resource Notification Dispatcher

+1. This is a backwards-compatible improvement to the ResourceStore API supported by experience gained in the JDBC resource store work. Niels and Jody have thrashed this one out quite thoroughly. Good work! Kind regards, Ben. On 07/01/16 15:46, Jody Garnett wrote: > This is a follow up to pull

Re: [Geoserver-devel] GSIP-136 Resource Notification Dispatcher

Looks good to me. I have updated the PR already to match the API change you made. Kind Regards Niels On 07-01-16 03:46, Jody Garnett wrote: This is a follow up to pull request #1361 introducing some new public API: https://github.com/geoser