On 25 September 2011 19:32, Andrea Aime wrote:
> Scratch scratch... not sure how to handle this one.
> One way might be to have the GeoServer process factory stop advertising
> them, but then have some internal delegation mechanism so that if
> gs:Contour is no more there, gt:Contour will be looke
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 10:20 AM, Michael Bedward wrote:
> Hi Andrea,
>
> I'm not looking to modify the new classes or their names. I just want
> to cull old classes that have been superseded by the new code. So for
> vectorizing, I'd get rid of the old process and factory classes and
> adapt the
Hi Jody, Andrea,
I'm going to add tests for the newly added raster processes so that
will be a bit more code review plus bring test coverage up to that
required for promotion.
I still haven't grokked the relationship between these processes and
coverage operations yet :(
Meanwhile, please see th
Hi Micheal:
I was going ask for a review; so I could update the tasks for taking this stuff
to supported. It appears as if this email thread is my review.
Andrea: I am going to push back some functionality from uDig (the rescope
"operation" will make an amazing process for geotools). I am try
Hi Andrea,
I'm not looking to modify the new classes or their names. I just want
to cull old classes that have been superseded by the new code. So for
vectorizing, I'd get rid of the old process and factory classes and
adapt the unit tests for the newer, neater PolygonExtractionProcess.
Regarding
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 7:04 AM, Michael Bedward
wrote:
> Hi Jody, Andrea,
>
> I'm looking at the raster processes in relation to a couple this issue:
>
> http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/GEOT-3855
>
> which then inspired this one:
>
> http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/GEOT-3857
>
> I'd like to check
> That still leaves a lot of processes in org.geotools.process.raster.gs:
> Perhaps I don't understand your question?
My question is can we move the contents of the raster.gs package into
raster and delete the gs package ?
> I don't mind if we add the static methods; it was not done yet as it is
Hello!
On Thursday, 22 September 2011 at 3:04 PM, Michael Bedward wrote:
> Hi Jody, Andrea,
>
> I'm looking at the raster processes in relation to a couple this issue:
>
> http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/GEOT-3855
>
> which then inspired this one:
>
> http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/GEOT-3857
>
Hi Jody, Andrea,
I'm looking at the raster processes in relation to a couple this issue:
http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/GEOT-3855
which then inspired this one:
http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/GEOT-3857
I'd like to check if either of you have any problems with GEOT-3857
going ahead ?
More gen
