On Fri, Aug 10, 2012 at 1:11 PM, Andrea Aime
<[email protected]>wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 10, 2012 at 8:50 PM, Martin Davis <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>
>> That would be helpful, I think.
>>
>
> Cool, I can do that
>
>
>>
>> One related issue around process namespace usage is that there is no way
>> to specify a namespace for an Annotation-driven process. AFAIS these
>> always get assigned to the "gs" namespace? It would be nice to be able to
>> specify a different namespace when creating custom processes.
>>
>
> I'm afraid this would be confusing, why not roll your factory if you are
> building custom processes instead?
> You can specify title and prefix in the constructor.
> The "gs" factory was really meant for GeoServer specific processes (it
> expanded beyond that
> mostly due to the convenience of registering yet another process there).
>
> If we start having processes in the same factory with different prefixes
> the issue you were talking
> about above, being difficult to guess in which "group" a process falls
> into, will only get worse.
>
I actually think the namespace and the group should be decoupled. I look at
a process namespace as publishing metadata rather than a grouping mechanism
although i can see why its used for that.
It seems like unnecessary overhead to have to write a factory just to set
up a custom namespace. And it goes against making things as easy as
possible to write a custom process, like with the annotation based process
stuff which hides the factory from you. Also thinking of the scripting
extension here where it's one process factory that loads scripts. I would
be +1 for being able to define it at the process level.
Others may disagree but i also don't feel like the current grouping is all
that unintuitive... it actually seems rather arbitrary which I think is a
strong argument for allowing "group" information to be specified on the
process itself since it knows which groups it will fall into best... Not by
any means saying that needs to be done now but I think at some point it
makes sense to rethink the grouping strategy perhaps coming up with a well
defined "taxonomy" if you will for processes which could potentially be
much more finer grained than what we have now.
$0.02
>
> Cheers
> Andrea
>
> --
> ==
> Our support, Your Success! Visit http://opensdi.geo-solutions.it for more
> information.
> ==
>
> Ing. Andrea Aime
> @geowolf
> Technical Lead
>
> GeoSolutions S.A.S.
> Via Poggio alle Viti 1187
> 55054 Massarosa (LU)
> Italy
> phone: +39 0584 962313
> fax: +39 0584 962313
> mob: +39 339 8844549
>
> http://www.geo-solutions.it
> http://twitter.com/geosolutions_it
>
> -------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Live Security Virtual Conference
> Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and
> threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions
> will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware
> threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/
> _______________________________________________
> 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.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Live Security Virtual Conference
Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and
threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions
will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware
threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/
_______________________________________________
Geoserver-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel
