[Geotools-devel] Process annotations improvements (with a WPS bit)

2012-06-08 Thread Andrea Aime
Hi, writing processes over and over let me to see some deficiencies in the WPS annotations that I would like to clear out. Some are general to processes, some are WPS usage specific (that's why I'm cross posting to gs-devevl). One thing I see I do over and over at the start of a process is value d

Re: [Geotools-devel] Process annotations improvements (with a WPS bit)

2012-06-08 Thread Juan Marín Otero
Andrea, Funny you bring this up, very timely as I've been looking at processes the past few days. On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 6:06 AM, Andrea Aime wrote: > Hi, > writing processes over and over let me to see some deficiencies in the > WPS annotations that > I would like to clear out. Some are genera

Re: [Geotools-devel] Process annotations improvements (with a WPS bit)

2012-06-08 Thread Andrea Aime
On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 1:40 PM, Juan Marín Otero wrote: >> One final thing that happened to me while writing processes is >> realizing that  a process >> will take long, that it cannot be written in a streaming manner for >> some reason, and thus >> really wanting the process to be only run in asy

Re: [Geotools-devel] API Change Proposal: ComplexFeature Parsing & Building Support

2012-06-08 Thread Justin Deoliveira
On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 7:51 PM, wrote: > Hi Justin et al., > > ** ** > > Thanks for your feedback. > > ** ** > > I could change append(...) to add(...) but I wouldn't be able to raise it > to the superclass (FeatureBuilder<...>) because the signatures are > different: append(Name, Propert

Re: [Geotools-devel] API Change Proposal: ComplexFeature Parsing & Building Support

2012-06-08 Thread Jody Garnett
> Also, Adam has created some lovely before-and-after UML diagrams in support > of this proposal: > https://www.seegrid.csiro.au/wiki/ASRDC/ChangedTypeHierarchies > > Do we as a matter of policy require this external content to be copied > to Codehaus Confluence, or is it OK to leave it on the s

[Geotools-devel] Process annotations discussion - validation checks

2012-06-08 Thread Jody Garnett
So this is what you were talking about with respect to the "process stuff not being ready". Okay lets get cracking; I don't want to commit to a stable until you are sorted…. > writing processes over and over let me to see some deficiencies in the > WPS annotations that > I would like to clear o

[Geotools-devel] Process annotations improvements - mime type

2012-06-08 Thread Jody Garnett
> Moving on to something WPS specific, we need to be able to declare > what mime types the input files/streams > we are going to accept, and which ones we are going to produce. > Normally we avoid this issue in GeoServer by trading objects (e.g., > RenderedImage, Coverage, FeatureCollection) > tha