Jody Garnett wrote: > Quick question: > - your diagram shows the existing persistence layer untouched? Is that > still the case or can we replace it with something that is more simple > to maintain .. reading further I see that appears to be future work. > Your configuration persistence page currently only documents the XStream > approach.
Yeah, changing the persistence layer is phase 3, and target for geoserver 2.x since it breaks backwards compatibility with our on disk storage format. I should make that clearer in the GSIP. > > Comments: > - ResourcePool idea is well presented, nice work > > Ignore if you want: > - can you show the difference between some information we keep > explicitly, like setName in your example, and how extra property > settings are handled over time You mean like maps of metadata? > - may want to consider org.geoserver.repository.FeatureTypeInfo (ie > change the package name) to avoid the use of the dreaded catalog word fair enough... catalog does kind of have a bad stigma attached to it. > > > Cheers, > Jody >> Hi all, >> >> Here is the newest version of the configuration GSIP for your reading >> pleasure. >> >> http://geoserver.org/display/GEOS/GSIP+8+-+New+Configuration+System >> >> Questions/comments/feedback welcome. It would be nice to be able to >> vote on this in next weeks IRC meeting. >> >> -Justin >> >> > > > !DSPAM:4007,4834cc92197581439371379! > -- Justin Deoliveira The Open Planning Project [EMAIL PROTECTED] ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ Geoserver-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel
