Jody Garn
Carlo Can
Here is the req:
https://github.com/geotools/geotools/pull/288
jira
https://jira.codehaus.org/browse/GEOT-4589
2013/10/2 Justin Deoliveira
> Echo of what Andrea said.
>
>
> On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 1:13 PM, Andrea Aime
> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 5:17 PM, carlo cancellieri <
>> carlo.c
Hi Jody,
The first part of your solution is not really a problem.
The real problem is on the second part.
In order to avoid the complexity of handling this, we chose to create one big
bundle with most of GeoTools jars : at least the ones that declare SPI
implementations. Then maven-shade-plugin
So with the big bundle it is kind of an all you can eat approach, so we
lose the ability to do plugins right?
Seems like a bit of a loss since OSGi is designed to enable safe control of
plugin resources.
(Note for uDig we also have all the jars in a single bundle, so they can
use the same classlo
You're partially right : We lose the ability to do non-OSGi plugins.
If you look carefully on Jira, I provided a bridge that loads OSGi services
corresponding to SPI into GeoTools' ServiceRegistry.
So if SPI implementations are registered as OSGi services, they become
available. This is how we ad
Still it is an interesting option, and we should collect workarounds like
this until we get better solution.
I note that the Eclipse Foundation may be in position to help us with this,
as GeoTools is being reviewed for use in the "location tech" industry
working group. So when given a chance we sh
Hi,
discussing the CSS integration of the randomized fills in the geoscript
community
some feedback came up about the names and meaning of the properties.
Since the current property names were originally discussed here, I guess
it's just
fair to share the feedback and give people in the GeoTools c
François
On Tue, Oct 8, 2013 at 1:50 AM, Jody Garnett wrote:
> > That is, you can specify meters as the uom, and then you can add px to a
> measure
> > to specify it's meant to be pixels. However the override is available
> only for pixels,
> > which is a bit weird.
> >
> > How about we implement this ove
On Tue, Oct 8, 2013 at 8:44 AM, Andrea Aime wrote:
> Hi,
> discussing the CSS integration of the randomized fills in the geoscript
> community
> some feedback came up about the names and meaning of the properties.
>
> Since the current property names were originally discussed here, I guess
> it's
>
> That's nothing, what about:
>>
>
> 10
> units
>
>
Not sure I understand - are you implying a conflict between literal syntax
and function arguments?
>
>> Sadly I think the first example is more consistent with the spirit of SE
>> 1.1 you quoted. The "2 3 10 1 m" allo
Can someone clarify the procedure for submitting a code contribution that is
a collaborative effort by authors from multiple companies?
Does item #7 of the contributor license agreement apply ("Should You wish to
submit work that is not Your original creation, You may submit it to the
Foundation s
Good morning:
There is no special procedure, each organisation needs to sign the contributors
license covering their staff members. If the individuals are participating on
their own time they should probably sign an individual contributors license as
well.
Note that the two organisations proba
Mike,
what is the nature of the collaboration? If the collaboration includes a
formal agreement that one party (i.e. one company) owns the copyright to
the work, then that party is able to contribute. Otherwise, we will
likely need all copyright owners to sign. I will consult with the
project
Hi Mike,
you already got one important piece of information, which is about the
license.
There is another important bit: design. Whatever your submission, unless
it's small, you
should try to discuss what you want to do before coding it, and take into
consideration
who is going to do long term main
On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 2:42 AM, Jody Garnett wrote:
> That's nothing, what about:
>>>
>>
>> 10
>> units
>>
>>
>
> Not sure I understand - are you implying a conflict between literal syntax
> and function arguments?
>
No, he's suggesting that the uom can be coming from a
On Tue, Oct 8, 2013 at 11:56 PM, David Winslow wrote:
> David was also questioning the usage of the "random" keyword, suggesting
>> fill-jitter might
>> be a better option.
>> Personally I don't like it, because I cannot associate jitter with the
>> random distribution of
>> symbols out of the box
On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 1:57 AM, Martin Davis wrote:
> I'm a bit late to the party here, but you might be interested in the idea
> of using Halton sequences as a way of producing "nicer than random" point
> distributions. See this post for some more details:
>
> http://lin-ear-th-inking.blogspot.
19 matches
Mail list logo
