Re: [Geotools-devel] Request for feedback/guidance: moving TimeParser from GeoServer to GeoTools

Probably the email list here, make a motion and ask PSC members to respond? We should be able to see a geotools example of donating code to JTS (here it is under formal correspondence ). -- Jody Garnett On Wed, 23 Oct 2019 at 09:47

Re: [Geotools-devel] ScriptRunner missing in class path

Hi Luis, we normally run those tests from a full blown Java IDE, don't think anyone has tried to do that from the command line in ages, and it requires quite some familiarity with how both Java and Maven work (e.g., stuff like the test classes ending up in target/test/classes is something considere

Re: [Geotools-devel] ScriptRunner missing in class path

Hello again, I located a .class file for ScriptRunner in modules/library/referencing/target/test-classes and added it to the class path. Like this the test can be run, but it is seeking the test scripts in the wrong folder: $ java -cp target/classes:target/test-classes:modules/library/referen

Re: [Geotools-devel] Request for feedback/guidance: moving TimeParser from GeoServer to GeoTools

In the meantime I have created a couple of JIRA with some details: GeoServer one, containing details https://osgeo-org.atlassian.net/browse/GEOS-9379 GeoTools one https://osgeo-org.atlassian.net/browse/GEOT-6409 Regards, Daniele On Wed, Oct 23, 2019 at 3:47 PM Daniele Romagnoli < daniele.romagn

Re: [Geotools-devel] ScriptRunner missing in class path

Hi Mark, thank you for your reply. mvn test-compile runs without errors, but it does not create the test-classes folder inside ./target. Thanks. -- Luís Sent with [ProtonMail](https://protonmail.com) Secure Email. ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐ On Monday, October 21, 2019 7:23 PM, mark wr

Re: [Geotools-devel] Request for feedback/guidance: moving TimeParser from GeoServer to GeoTools

On Tue, Oct 22, 2019 at 3:32 PM Andrea Aime wrote: > On Tue, Oct 22, 2019 at 3:22 PM Ian Turton wrote: > >> It is possible (i.e. we've done similar before) - there is a licencing >> issue as the code needs to go from GPL to LGPL but as OSgeo "owns" both >> code bases I don't think it is an issue