Rob Atkinson wrote:
>> I am ok with putting these files in the services directory but whether they
>> are at the top level or in a sub directory really makes no difference to how
>> they will be read. The existence of the file does not mean the service is
>> active, and vice versa.
> 
> Understood - it wasnt about the functionality, but simply not setting
> a number of particular services in stone and needing changes to
> directory structure to add any more (a top level file is part of
> directory structure according to the scope of this request)
Cool, sounds good, services directory it is.
> 
>>> 2) We are still burying database connections deep, and not re-using
>>> them.  I'd like database connections and other local configuration to
>>> be normalised and re-used.
>>>
>>> can we have a top level directory connections/ or authorisations/
>>>
>>> This is a real issue when we distribute a re-usable Geoserver
>>> configuration via version control - with multiple geoservers
>>> delivering common stuff - INSPIRE for example would require this.
>>> There may be an element of local mapping - but we actually found that
>>> was often encapsulated in database views and it was only multiple,
>>> buried, not-separately-testable database connections that needed
>>> configuring.
>> While I agree with the concept I want to reinforce that this proposal is not
>> proposing any improvements to the configuration, and is not proposing any
>> new information to be stores in the dat directory. It is just a
>> reorganization of the information that is already there.
>>
> 
> OK - so if this is not going to make it harder to fix this later,  you
> have my +1 officially.
> 
> 
>> We don't store this info in config today so this is out of scope.
>>> 3) It is important that namespaces be "augmented" by explicit
>>> declaration - the general case is that the target configuration
>>> exposes a namespace as part of a contract between the service and the
>>> world of clients. It should be possible to "make this up" during
>>> FeatureType configuration, or use one extracted from the definition of
>>> the FeatureType (the application schema case). Its not clear to me if
>>> this is an issue - probably an implementation issue, not a directory
>>> structure issue
>>>
>> You lost me on this one :).
>>
> 
> Manually defining namespaces during configuration is a corner case in
> the long run. These will always be defined in application schemas, or
> can be generated automatically without user configuration if they have
> no external meaning. So, just want to avoid putting too much effort
> into something I think needs fixing.
Ahh I see, and yeah I fully agree. This is the motivation behind the 
workspace idea, have it be a container for data stores, etc... and have 
a namespace just be an attribute of a feature type. Ideally the way it 
would work is as you say, upload a bunch of application schemas, figure 
out the application schema namespaces, and choice one when setting up a 
feature type.
> 
> 
>>> Sorry to provide feedback so late.
>>>
>>> Rob Atkinson
>>>
>>> On Wed, Mar 18, 2009 at 10:40 AM, Jody Garnett <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>>> Thanks for the nice clear presentation - I am happy to vote +1.
>>>>
>>>> I would consider:
>>>> global.xml
>>>> service/wfs.xml
>>>> service/wms.xml
>>>> service/wcs.xml
>>>> service/wps.xml
>>>>
>>>> But it does not make much of a difference.
>>>>
>>>> Jody
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Mar 18, 2009 at 6:17 AM, Justin Deoliveira <[email protected]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>
>>>>> I would like to call for a vote on GSIP 34:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> http://geoserver.org/display/GEOS/GSIP+34+-+New+data+directory+structure+for+2.x
>>>>>
>>>>> Most feedback as been incorporated but the proposal of adding the idea
>>>>> of maps into the picture has not been incorporated for now. The reasons
>>>>> why being:
>>>>>
>>>>> 1) It increases scope in the short term without a lot of gain. Since the
>>>>> the upgrade to including maps into the picture is strictly additive to
>>>>> the data directory structure, it won't be an issue to add it later.
>>>>> Implementing maps in the short term, even just creating the idea of a
>>>>> default map is not trivial, and adds a pretty big hurdle.
>>>>>
>>>>> 2) Andrea pointed out that the data publishing split with regard to maps
>>>>> has not totally been fleshed out at this point. And indeed there is some
>>>>> thoughts about using a thread local view of the catalog as an
>>>>> alternative. So adding in maps to the structure now could indeed be a
>>>>> crutch come later.
>>>>>
>>>>> So that is the rationale for leaving it out of the picture for now.
>>>>> Those who stand by the feedback still can vote -1.
>>>>>
>>>>> So with that said, let the voting begin.
>>>>>
>>>>> -Justin
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Justin Deoliveira
>>>>> OpenGeo - http://opengeo.org
>>>>> Enterprise support for open source geospatial.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> Apps built with the Adobe(R) Flex(R) framework and Flex Builder(TM) are
>>>>> powering Web 2.0 with engaging, cross-platform capabilities. Quickly and
>>>>> easily build your RIAs with Flex Builder, the Eclipse(TM)based
>>>>> development
>>>>> software that enables intelligent coding and step-through debugging.
>>>>> Download the free 60 day trial. http://p.sf.net/sfu/www-adobe-com
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Geoserver-devel mailing list
>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel
>>>>>
>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> Apps built with the Adobe(R) Flex(R) framework and Flex Builder(TM) are
>>>> powering Web 2.0 with engaging, cross-platform capabilities. Quickly and
>>>> easily build your RIAs with Flex Builder, the Eclipse(TM)based
>>>> development
>>>> software that enables intelligent coding and step-through debugging.
>>>> Download the free 60 day trial. http://p.sf.net/sfu/www-adobe-com
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Geoserver-devel mailing list
>>>> [email protected]
>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel
>>>>
>>
>> --
>> Justin Deoliveira
>> OpenGeo - http://opengeo.org
>> Enterprise support for open source geospatial.
>>


-- 
Justin Deoliveira
OpenGeo - http://opengeo.org
Enterprise support for open source geospatial.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Apps built with the Adobe(R) Flex(R) framework and Flex Builder(TM) are
powering Web 2.0 with engaging, cross-platform capabilities. Quickly and
easily build your RIAs with Flex Builder, the Eclipse(TM)based development
software that enables intelligent coding and step-through debugging.
Download the free 60 day trial. http://p.sf.net/sfu/www-adobe-com
_______________________________________________
Geoserver-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel

Reply via email to