Re: [Geoserver-devel] Speeding up the GeoServer build by splitting some modules

I certainly have no objections to things being faster. My only concern was on the geotools side, if there was an API change. I don’t see that as a consideration on geoserver though (application vs library). I’m not really able to help with it at the moment though, although I may be able

Re: [Geoserver-devel] GeoServer 2.13.1 Artifacts available for testing

PDF user manual looks OK: Reasonable version and date info, downloads fine and appears complete. Booted WAR on tomcat 8 (Ubuntu 17.10). Looks fine: • GeoServer Version 2.13.1 • Git Revision cae7496cb49213c27458c47551fb4797d03825e0 • Build Date 20-May-2018 00:44 • GeoTools Version 19.1 (rev

Re: [Geoserver-devel] Integrating App-Schema and Apache Solr

I was more thinking about this as an output format / representation of the complex feature. As a future consideration (if we ever had time) your work could be extended to automatically infer a mapping definition from the geopackage with related tables. Brad From: Nuno Oliveira Sent:

Re: [Geoserver-devel] GeoServer: self deleting layers/featuretypes

This might have been better posted to geoserver-users, but presumably whatever does the setup could just add a cron job to do a REST API delete later. Brad -- Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's

Re: [Geoserver-devel] Some funny discovery about time parsing: no more than 100 times!

Andrea, I agree it’s a bug fix, but the reason we differentiate is mostly about stability. Maybe leave it a bit longer than a bug-fix backport and not as long as a feature release? Where it is on the scale is subjective, and I’m sure you can make that judgement better than any of us.

Re: [Geoserver-devel] Integrating App-Schema and Apache Solr

Hi Nuno, I’m not sure if you’ve seen it, but there has been some work on adding related tables support to GeoPackage This is public at http://www.geopackage.org/18-000.html (or https://github.com/jyutzler/geopackage-related-tables which is basically the source code for the spec). If I

Re: [Geoserver-devel] KML/KMZ support broken?

Hi Idan, Just to follow up on Andrea’s suggestions, I did some testing with a current GeoServer (master) build and Google Earth EC 7.3.0.3832 (32-bit) with some rasters from the standard release (nurc:ImgSample and nurc:Pk50095). They looked fine – definitely no reversed images, so its

Re: [Geoserver-devel] KML/KMZ support broken?

If you need a quick fix for the swapped coordinates, this might help: diff --git a/src/kml/src/main/java/org/geoserver/kml/sequence/PlainFolderSequenceFactory.java b/src/kml/src/main/java/org/geoserver/kml/sequence/PlainFolderSequenceFactory.java index c32e3280e..4a973aac5 100644 ---

Re: [Geoserver-devel] KML/KMZ support broken?

I would agree that the LatLonBox values appear to be swapped in the GroundOverlay. This will occur in KML compressed or plain, but maybe not in network link. Can you please file a Jira ticket for that? The Document/Folder structure is almost certainly valid, and lack of handling is a bug in

Re: [Geoserver-devel] Reminder: GeoTools / GeoServer meeting at 15:30 UTC on Tuesday

Please accept my apologies for this meeting. -Original Message- From: Ben Caradoc-Davies [mailto:b...@transient.nz] Sent: Tuesday, 23 January 2018 6:32 AM To: Geoserver-devel Subject: [Geoserver-devel] Reminder: GeoTools / GeoServer meeting at

Re: [Geoserver-devel] geoserver 2.12.2 preflight artifacts available for testing

I checked the war started on tomcat8 on Ubuntu 16.04, and did a few light checks. Added the CSW extension, checked it had a GetCapabilities. GeoServer Version 2.12.2 Git Revision c513fdd977af572e39712bcc425b0bcbf753f108 Build Date 23-Jan-2018 01:28 GeoTools

Re: [Geoserver-devel] Allowing access to HTTP headers from log patterns

+1. To me this seems like core diagnostics capability – if you need it on a machine where you’re doing differential diagnostics without direct access to it, then adding a plugin later is probably going to be difficult. Brad

Re: [Geoserver-devel] GSIP 165 - Add isolated workspaces concept to GeoServer, quick vote :)

+1. There was one part of the GSIP: It is only possible to create two or more workspaces with the same namespace in GeoServer if only one of them is non isolated, in the example above st2 is the isolated workspace. Which I found a bit confusing. Just so I'm clear, is the intent: "It is

Re: [Geoserver-devel] Promoting SLDservice community module to extension

I’m +0 on this. Are you actually looking for votes on the GSIP at this time? Brad From: Mauro Bartolomeoli Sent: Wednesday, 1 August 2018 1:12 AM To: Geoserver-devel Subject: Re: [Geoserver-devel] Promoting SLDservice community module to extension GSIP is here:

Re: [Geoserver-devel] Reminder: GeoTools / GeoServer meeting at 15:30 UTC on Tuesday

Please accept my apologies - 0130 in my time zone isn't achievable at the moment. Brad -Original Message- From: Ben Caradoc-Davies Sent: Tuesday, 7 August 2018 6:04 AM To: Geoserver-devel Subject: [Geoserver-devel] Reminder: GeoTools / GeoServer meeting at 15:30 UTC on Tuesday

Re: [Geoserver-devel] GeoServer 2.12.5 artifacts available for testing

I downloaded and smoke tested the WAR on Tomcat8. * GeoServer Version 2.12.5 * Git Revision 7190246d22191fc81c4630f8e5d71eaa7ba74057 * Build Date 20-Aug-2018 22:46 * GeoTools Version 18.5 (rev fd3cdc83359516506d5c2fec602c36cc66e0f31b) * GeoWebCache Version 1.12.5

Re: [Geoserver-devel] Proposing Steve Ikeoka for commit rights

+1 from me too. From: Andrea Aime Sent: Wednesday, 22 August 2018 4:20 AM To: Geoserver-devel ; sikeoka Subject: [Geoserver-devel] Proposing Steve Ikeoka for commit rights Hi all, I'm writing to propose Steve Ikeoka, cc'ed, for commit rights on the GeoServer repository. Steve has

Re: [Geoserver-devel] [GSIP-164] Promoting geofence and geofence-server as extensions modules

I should have noted I already added my vote on the GSIP. I was looking for Alessio’s opinion on the quality of the tests – test coverage (especially by line) isn’t the only thing that adds to value. Brad From: Andrea Aime Sent: Saturday, 25 August 2018 12:02 AM To: Brad Hards Cc:

Re: [Geoserver-devel] [Geotools-devel] Reminder: GeoTools / GeoServer meeting at 19:30 UTC on Tuesday

Sorry, still a bit early in my time zone. Brad -Original Message- From: Ben Caradoc-Davies Sent: Tuesday, 24 July 2018 7:08 AM To: Geotools-Devel list Subject: [Geotools-devel] Reminder: GeoTools / GeoServer meeting at 19:30 UTC on Tuesday GeoTools / GeoServer committee meeting on

Re: [Geoserver-devel] [GSIP-164] Promoting geofence and geofence-server as extensions modules

Alessio: thanks – that answers my question and allays my concerns. I am still +1 in any case. Brad From: Alessio Fabiani Sent: Friday, 31 August 2018 10:43 PM To: Brad Hards ; Emanuele Tajariol Cc: Andrea Aime ; Alessio Fabiani ; Geoserver-devel Subject: Re: [Geoserver-devel]

Re: [Geoserver-devel] Permission to create Quality of Service Community Module

No objections to the community module. It looks like the standards work is still in progress. Is this intended to move out of community module land after the standard is finalised? Would it be an extension or folded in to the main WMS / WFS code base? Brad From:

Re: [Geoserver-devel] Thinking out loud... should the next GeoServer be "GeoServer 22.0"?

I would suggest adopting semantic versioning, which means everything will be major versions (because of the geotools versioning). Having geoserver and geotools use the same version numbers would probably be easier to remember. I do get Chris’ concern (its mainly a US DoD thing – version

Re: [Geoserver-devel] Thinking out loud... should the next GeoServer be "GeoServer 22.0"?

Or the next geotools is 22.0. Version numbers are pretty cheap, wasting a few isn't a big deal. -Original Message- From: Ben Caradoc-Davies Sent: Friday, 13 July 2018 9:06 AM To: br...@frogmouth.net; 'Andrea Aime' ; 'Geoserver-devel' Subject: Re: [Geoserver-devel] Thinking out

Re: [Geoserver-devel] Thinking out loud... should the next GeoServer be "GeoServer 22.0"?

Just that Andrea suggested the next version of GeoServer be 22.0 (see Subject line) with some pseudo-math support argument. I'm not particularly worried about what we call it (GS 20.0 works for me), but consistency would be helpful. -Original Message- From: Ben Caradoc-Davies Sent:

Re: [Geoserver-devel] Thinking out loud... should the next GeoServer be "GeoServer 22.0"?

Slightly tangential: The date-based thing might work well if we're going to do the Enterprise versioning packaging. -Original Message- From: Ben Caradoc-Davies Sent: Friday, 13 July 2018 9:06 AM To: br...@frogmouth.net; 'Andrea Aime' ; 'Geoserver-devel' Subject: Re: [Geoserver-devel]

Re: [Geoserver-devel] access to a layer's queryable flag through REST

I had a quick look at the code (not for 2.8.5, which is way too old - you really should upgrade), and I don't see it referenced in the REST API. It could be added to the REST API or some other interface - feel free to submit a PR or feature request. See

Re: [Geoserver-devel] Codebase reformat using Google/AOSP format

+1 for the GeoServer part. For the avoidance of doubt, I’m positive for doing it on geotools and geowebcache, but I’m not voting for those. Brad From: Andrea Aime Sent: Sunday, 15 April 2018 7:47 PM To: Geotools-Devel list

Re: [Geoserver-devel] Reminder: GeoTools / GeoServer meeting at 15:30 UTC on Tuesday

Please accept my apologies. Brad -- Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot ___

Re: [Geoserver-devel] GeoServer 2.12.3 pre-release artifacts ready for test

Andrea, Thanks for the release work. I downloaded the war and htmldocs, booted the war on tomcat8: * GeoServer Version 2.12.3 * Git Revision 86938b34177ae82a43126a54babab2ab3df42863 * Build Date 22-Apr-2018 08:14 * GeoTools Version 18.3 (rev

Re: [Geoserver-devel] Reminder: GeoTools / GeoServer meeting at 15:30 UTC on Tuesday

Please accept my apologies - can't make this time. Brad -Original Message- From: Ben Caradoc-Davies Sent: Tuesday, 20 March 2018 6:34 AM To: Geoserver-devel Subject: [Geoserver-devel] Reminder: GeoTools / GeoServer meeting at

Re: [Geoserver-devel] GeoServer builds and runs on JDK11

Nice work. I had a quick look at the GWC changes. The lang3 and surefire upgrades look like they could go on master now. Also the oracle releases maven repo removal looks like it could go in. That surefire upgrade is probably worth doing on other projects too. We probably should find

Re: [Geoserver-devel] GeoServer builds and runs on JDK11

I tried the surefire upgrade and it worked fine locally (with JDK8). Put up https://github.com/geotools/geotools/pull/2102 to see what Travis and AppVeyor say. Brad ___ Geoserver-devel mailing list Geoserver-devel@lists.sourceforge.net

Re: [Geoserver-devel] Java 11 upgrade, looking for internal API usage

The slower tests shouldn’t be affected by the compiler right? So that means the *runtime* is noticeably slower. That isn’t good news. May need a plan follow-on activities for more performance-oriented stuff later. Maybe towards the end of the sprint we can work out a plan for tooling that

Re: [Geoserver-devel] Proposal: allow configuring services available for a given layer

+1 on the concept. Is there a plan for a REST API for this? For the backwards compatibility problem, I concur with the default approach for an existing data dir (preserve existing behaviour). For the new service part of the problem (“Users plugging-in a new service while selective

Re: [Geoserver-devel] GeoServer PSC: GeoSolutions proposal to use OSGeo UK funds for QGIS styling interoperability

Brad Hards: +1. Assuming that the proposal is approved by the PSC (looks like we have enough votes, although I haven’t counted), and the proposing org accepts, I will add another US$1500. I trust the proposing org to judge whether to provide a better polished version of the proposed scope

Re: [Geoserver-devel] propose change to meet schedule

I’m not going to make it (3am). That shouldn’t be a determinant on whether it works better for the majority though. From: Jody Garnett Sent: Wednesday, 14 November 2018 6:48 AM To: GeoServer Subject: [Geoserver-devel] propose change to meet schedule With our geographic dispersal rating

Re: [Geoserver-devel] propose change to meet schedule

3am or 4:30am or 6am isn’t really going to make any difference to me. I’d prefer something that worked really well for the majority than something that is a poor compromise for everyone. I will occasionally make it (depending on travel and work commitments), so just do what works well for

Re: [Geoserver-devel] proposal: Approve up to $1000 to support code sprint participants

+1 Brad From: Jody Garnett Sent: Wednesday, 10 October 2018 7:41 AM To: GeoServer Subject: [Geoserver-devel] proposal: Approve up to $1000 to support code sprint participants I would like to ask the GeoServer PSC to approve the following proposal: Approve up to $1000 to support

Re: [Geoserver-devel] Travis CI build failure on hazelcast

Luca, Please understand that the GeoServer project does not control the Travis infrastructure. I have restarted the build, but if that doesn't help, you can also "resubmit" the CI build by closing and re-opening the PR. Brad -Original Message- From: Luca Morandini Sent: Monday, 24

Re: [Geoserver-devel] PSC: GeoServer 2019 Budget request

+0. Do we need to bid for sprint funding for the post-contract activity? Brad From: Jody Garnett Sent: Monday, 21 January 2019 8:10 AM To: GeoServer Subject: [Geoserver-devel] PSC: GeoServer 2019 Budget request After feedback and revision via email and chat we have: *

Re: [Geoserver-devel] Reminder: GeoTools/GeoServer meeting at 19:30 UTC tomorrow

Even if I could occasionally make 0630 (which will revert to 0530 once daylight savings ends here), I’m not really awake enough to contribute much. So optimise for those doing most of the work (hence needing most of the coordination), and I’ll do what I can to match that if I’m travelling.

Re: [Geoserver-devel] GeoServer 2.13.4 pre-release artifacts ready for testing

User manual PDF looks OK, has the right version. User and developer HTML manuals look OK, have the right version. Javadoc HTML looks OK, has the right version. Booted the WAR on Ubuntu 18.04. Versions look reasonable. Did some light checking of GetCapabilities, layer previews. No

Re: [Geoserver-devel] Release train for 2.14.1 starting later this week

PDF, HTML and Javadoc download / unzip OK and have the 2.14.1 version number. .war doesn’t start on tomcat8 with Oracle JDK 11 or OpenJDK 11 on Ubuntu. Looks like the problem is missing jaxb dependencies. After fixing that, it starts up a bit further, but gives a backtrace that starts with:

[Geoserver-devel] TeamEngine Docker (was GeoServer 2019 budget)

I took a look at the docker tools, and it looks like we can build an “everything” docker image, or a docker image per test suite. The process is slightly annoying, perhaps we want to publish our versions of the tests to an OSGEO Maven repo. We don’t really care about “everything” in terms of

Re: [Geoserver-devel] TeamEngine Docker (was GeoServer 2019 budget)

Thanks for raising the ticket, but I think the missing deps were expected (noted in the teamengine-docker README). I also hit the lack of deps so wanted to simplify the docker image build if possible, but also some prioritisation / narrowing of the tests might help us to focus the effort.

Re: [Geoserver-devel] geoserver 2.15.0 artifacts ready for testing

I am clearly pretty late to the party, but I tested a fresh install of Ubuntu 18.04.02 and Ubuntu 19.04 (nightly) with tomcat8 and geoserver.war. No plugins attempted. Did some layer previews, a few random GetCapabilities. No problems noted with either configuration. Thanks for the

Re: [Geoserver-devel] (Cross post) Deprecation cleanup branches ready

Andrea, I tried to read the changes – its beyond me at the moment. I did build the geotools, geowebcache and geoserver branches locally (on ubuntu 1904 and openjdk11) and booted the resulting war file on tomcat9. Looks good. I can only express my gratitude for the lone geowolf effort,

Re: [Geoserver-devel] April release train starting

PDF manual has right version and a lot of pages. Deployed the .war on tomcat9 on geoserver 19.04 with default JVM (openjdk 11.0.3). Restarted – runs up OK. Logged in, expected UI shows. Tasmania and NYC layer previews work OK. Spearfish layers show a ServiceException

Re: [Geoserver-devel] Version control for local Geoserver Repository

You could rebase your changes. Or just move your extension out of the tree.Its your code - if it isn't going to be part of GeoServer do it however you like.Brad.On 13 Oct 2020 3:03 pm, maven apache wrote:I am building a local geoserver extension which does not have the plan to make it open

Re: [Geoserver-devel] Advice on UI approach

Seems like we normally start with freemarker templates, and that might be appropriate in your case. Otherwise its pretty open with what works in terms of Wicket - I don't think that the admin UI is a great source of UX design patterns,  so not a lot of constraints. One thing that you might want to

Re: [Geoserver-devel] 2.18.3 release artefacts ready for test

I checked docs and war. Seems OK on initial login and layer preview, although I thought we had a PDF users manual and I didn't see that.BradOn 23 Apr 2021 2:55 am, Jody Garnett wrote:Checked downloads, and they are fine.Noticed some INFO messages in the logs that appear to detailed:22 Apr