Thanks Justin: We covered most of this in the IRC meeting today. I do understand that deadlines must be met (we don't want Andrea dead after all).
Being accountable for patches (and keeping the big picture in mind) is the other half of keeping trunk stable - and makes me glad we are all working on trunk these days. Jody > Its a tough call. Based on correctness jody, I agree with you. But with > the bandaged feature model and datastores we have how can people like > Andrea who have deadlines hold out. Especially since the new feature > model work is still just a branch with no plan to come home. I myself > want to keep weary of the new model... but I also understand that is > still a far time off. So until we have a plan and funding, we are > probably going to have to put up with little fixes such as these and > doing things the "wrong way". > > My 2c > > Jody Garnett wrote: > >> The reason is the next factory implementation will break your assumption >> (about how min/max relates to nullability). >> >> Last time we had this kind of conversation I spent a couple days fixing >> query, is this the same kind of deal? >> >> I don't want to see us doing isolated fixes - I want to see the class >> responsibilities clearly defined and tested for. >> If you find the codebase too large then don't update the unsupported >> jdbc datastores, or leave the hacks in GeoServer until >> someone does have the time to fix GeoTools. >> >> I understand that this SimpleFeatureBuilder change is a sore point that >> everyone wishes another person would do. Just like with >> the providence review this is thankless work - and the reason we have a >> PMC. Your bug may be the motivation needed to call >> together a work part on this topic. >> >> Cheers, >> Jody >> >> >> >> >> >> >>> Jody Garnett ha scritto: >>> >>>> Let's leave attribute factory stupid ... we need to switch over to >>>> using SimpleTypeBuilder anyways ... put the smarts there. This bug >>>> gives a good reason to go in there and make the change. (well other >>>> then the fact it is needed for 2.4) >>>> >>> Jody, I'm supposed to work on versioned datastore, not on switching >>> over to simple type builder. To make the switch I would have to work >>> on all jdbc data store, test them all... not something I can do, it >>> would take at last a full day to make it seriously (and I don't have >>> MySql around). >>> >>> I insist, is there any good reason for not putting the logic >>> in default attribute factory? That would be a few lines of code only. >>> >>> Cheers >>> Andrea >>> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT >> Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your >> opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys-and earn cash >> http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV >> _______________________________________________ >> Geoserver-devel mailing list >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel >> >> !DSPAM:1004,45f5a14c194091365099012! >> >> > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys-and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV _______________________________________________ Geotools-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geotools-devel
