[Geotools-devel] Remove broken (AbstractDataStoreFactory) modules?

As part of the https://osgeo-org.atlassian.net/browse/GEOT-5859 upgrade from commons httpclient to httpcomponents 4.x I've noted some broken modules (won't build because of AbstractDataStoreFactory) that use that API, such as couchdb and the app-schema webservice. Not related to httpclient up

Re: [Geotools-devel] GeoTools / GeoServer PMC meeting - 2019-06-11

On 6/12/19 8:17 AM, Andrea Aime wrote: The SQL server one I have not run in ages, tried quickly but could not get remote connections running (tried several guides, still not working, not sure where the issue is). May try again later down the road, I'm going through a couple of difficult weeks r

Re: [Geotools-devel] Remove broken (AbstractDataStoreFactory) modules?

Yes, we can remove them. On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 2:48 AM Brad Hards wrote: > As part of the https://osgeo-org.atlassian.net/browse/GEOT-5859 upgrade > from commons httpclient to httpcomponents 4.x I’ve noted some broken > modules (won’t build because of AbstractDataStoreFactory) that use that

Re: [Geotools-devel] Remove broken (AbstractDataStoreFactory) modules?

Forgot to reply on this, as far as I know, which is pretty much nothing,  that unsupported module is used to support consuming GML from an  web service ... so it is kind of a data store for App-Schema. That say, I never used it and don't even know if it is working or not. So I'm whit Jody let's rem

[Geotools-devel] Jenkins build is back to normal : geotools-master-online-mysql #966

See ___ GeoTools-Devel mailing list GeoTools-Devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geotools-devel

Re: [Geotools-devel] GeoTools / GeoServer PMC meeting - 2019-06-11

Hi Andrea, If people are actually going to pay attention to the tests and disably/fix them where applicable, then yes, it seems perfectly reasonable to try and get them running. My point was - last time they broke, around a year ago, no one seemed to care enough to do so, and no one tried fixing t

Re: [Geotools-devel] GeoTools / GeoServer PMC meeting - 2019-06-11

On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 6:24 PM Torben Barsballe < tbarsba...@federal.planet.com> wrote: > Hi Andrea, > > If people are actually going to pay attention to the tests and disably/fix > them where applicable, then yes, it seems perfectly reasonable to try and > get them running. > My point was - last

Re: [Geotools-devel] GeoTools / GeoServer PMC meeting - 2019-06-11

Hi Mark, we use Travis only for PR checks, but not for the main build. But the docker image reference is nice, I can run it locally too and hopefully there are not windows specific madness bits blocking access to the server (firewall, binding tcp to specific IP addresses and the like). I'm already

Re: [Geotools-devel] GeoTools / GeoServer PMC meeting - 2019-06-11

Hi Andrea Yes, as long as there is actually interest in the test, then I can look into getting it set up. I can't give any useful timeline for when the oracle test will be up and running, as acquiring an oracle instance is going to be a bit more annoying than PostGIS (and getting the windows build

Re: [Geotools-devel] GeoTools / GeoServer PMC meeting - 2019-06-11

On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 6:51 PM Torben Barsballe < tbarsba...@federal.planet.com> wrote: > Hi Andrea > > Yes, as long as there is actually interest in the test, then I can look > into getting it set up. > I can't give any useful timeline for when the oracle test will be up and > running, as acquir

Re: [Geotools-devel] GeoTools / GeoServer PMC meeting - 2019-06-11

A docker image could be much simpler - I'll look into it, thanks. Torben On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 10:10 AM Andrea Aime wrote: > On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 6:51 PM Torben Barsballe < > tbarsba...@federal.planet.com> wrote: > >> Hi Andrea >> >> Yes, as long as there is actually interest in the test,