Hi Martin, That sounds good to me. There are a couple things I want to improve, such as better exception handling and more tests but I think it is close. I can sync up the Shapefile branch and use your sis-feature if others have no objection . The link you sent looks like a reasonable way to represent an interface for a Feature.
Thanks, Travis On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 5:44 AM, Martin Desruisseaux < [email protected]> wrote: > Hello Travis and all > > Would it be a good time to start the moving the Shapefile code from its > branch to the trunk? If so, what about the following plan? > > I noticed that the code contains a Feature class [1]. Features are a wide > topic which will concern most SIS modules. Consequently I suggest to create > a core/sis-feature module, put only the Feature class in it, and try to > make it closer to the GeoAPI-pending Feature interface [2] (not necessarily > implement that interface right now, but at least try to make it > compatible). Once we have basic Feature class, the remaining of Shapefile > store could follow. > > If peoples agree, I could create that initial core/sis-feature module. Any > advice/objection? > > Martin > > > [1] https://svn.apache.org/repos/**asf/sis/branches/Shapefile/** > storage/sis-shapefile/src/**main/java/org/apache/sis/**storage/shapefile/<https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/sis/branches/Shapefile/storage/sis-shapefile/src/main/java/org/apache/sis/storage/shapefile/> > [2] http://www.geoapi.org/**snapshot/pending/org/opengis/** > feature/Feature.html<http://www.geoapi.org/snapshot/pending/org/opengis/feature/Feature.html> > >
