On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 5:41 PM, Gabriel Roldan wrote:
>> On a related note, in order to being able of saving the configuration from
>> a layer edit page tab to someplace different than the layer/resource
>> metadata map, some mechanism shall exist so that when hitting save both the
>> layer is sa
On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 11:14 AM, Gabriel Roldan wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 1:00 PM, Gabriel Roldan wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 12:55 PM, Andrea Aime
>> wrote:
>> > On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 4:13 PM, Gabriel Roldan
>> wrote:
>> >> Rest assured having the tile layer configuration so
On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 1:00 PM, Gabriel Roldan wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 12:55 PM, Andrea Aime
> wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 4:13 PM, Gabriel Roldan
> wrote:
> >> Rest assured having the tile layer configuration so close to the
> >> layer/group is "handy". Specially because of the m
On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 12:55 PM, Andrea Aime
wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 4:13 PM, Gabriel Roldan wrote:
>> Rest assured having the tile layer configuration so close to the
>> layer/group is "handy". Specially because of the monolithic gwc
>> configuration file, which would have to be overridd
On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 4:13 PM, Gabriel Roldan wrote:
> Rest assured having the tile layer configuration so close to the
> layer/group is "handy". Specially because of the monolithic gwc
> configuration file, which would have to be overridden as a whole
> every time a layer config changes. Which m
WRT storing the tile layer configuration as part of the layer/group
metadata map:
The more I think about it, the more I'm inclined _not_ to store the
tile layer config as part of the metadata map.
As it evolved enough as not to be any "simple" property of the map, I
think trying to make it fit is
On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 10:33 AM, Andrea Aime
wrote:
>> Now, while enabling to
>> configure almost every aspect of the cached layer, instead of storing
>> a single metadata entry for each cached layer property, I'd rather
>> store the whole tile layer configuration as a single metadata entry,
>> i
On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 4:11 AM, Andrea Aime
wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 10:57 PM, Gabriel Roldan
> wrote:
>>
>> Yeah, the concern makes complete sense.
>>
>> My hope is (with proper documentation) this makes it simpler. Like in
>> if you want to configure a cached layer through the REST API
On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 10:57 PM, Gabriel Roldan wrote:
> Yeah, the concern makes complete sense.
>
> My hope is (with proper documentation) this makes it simpler. Like in
> if you want to configure a cached layer through the REST API, you
> should use the GWC REST API. And the way to do that is b
On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 6:39 PM, David Winslow wrote:
> The REST API exposes metadata attributes in both JSON and XML formats, so it
> could be argued that either format is equally convenient. I think the big
> problem is documentation though - without digging into GeoServer's code is
> it possib
The REST API exposes metadata attributes in both JSON and XML formats, so
it could be argued that either format is equally convenient. I think the
big problem is documentation though - without digging into GeoServer's code
is it possible to figure out what keys to use and what the values should
lo
On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 10:47 AM, Andrea Aime
wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 5:54 PM, Gabriel Roldan wrote:
>>
>>
>> _trunk only_, plus a strong desire to get a stable branch out of 2.2.x
>> sooner rather than later. Although I'm not sure for how long we plan
>> to keep 2.1.x as _the_ stable bra
On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 5:54 PM, Gabriel Roldan wrote:
>
>
> _trunk only_, plus a strong desire to get a stable branch out of 2.2.x
> sooner rather than later. Although I'm not sure for how long we plan
> to keep 2.1.x as _the_ stable branch, it looks to me like 2.2.x is in
> need to get some real
Hey Andrea, thanks for the great feedback.
comments inline.
On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 10:33 AM, Andrea Aime
wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 6:32 PM, Gabriel Roldan wrote:
>>
>> Hello all,
>>
>> I'd like to ask for your opinions on a number of GWC integration
>> improvements, as a continuation of
On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 6:32 PM, Gabriel Roldan wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> I'd like to ask for your opinions on a number of GWC integration
> improvements, as a continuation of the earlier work presented a couple
> weeks ago, for which I'm copying the screenshots bellow.
>
They look good (most of t
15 matches
Mail list logo
