[Geoserver-devel] [Hudson] Build failed in Hudson: cite-wfs-1.1-2.3.x #25

See -- [...truncated 4155 lines...] [exec] Assertion: Run test group for cleaning up (deleting) the features inserted by the Transactions. [exec] Tes

Re: [Geoserver-devel] Some problems for 2.2.5 release

Hmmm... odd indeed. When i released from 2.3.x i didn't run into the problem, i explicitly checked since it was a problem last time around. On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 10:04 AM, Mauro Bartolomeoli < mauro.bartolome...@geo-solutions.it> wrote: > As a workaround I temporarily changed the job to remove

[Geoserver-devel] [jira] (GEOS-5664) Improve Coverage of KVP and XML Tests for WCS 2.0

Simone Gi

Re: [Geoserver-devel] Some problems for 2.2.5 release

As a workaround I temporarily changed the job to remove the offending folder before doing the release. After the release I changed back the job to it's original configuration. I was simply doing a rm -rf && cd build && publish_release.sh We'll see at the next 2.2.x release if the issue is always

[Geoserver-devel] wps geoprocessing orchestration

Hi I'm tasked with creating a wps geoprocessing orchestration UI and I was curious to see if anyone had any insight on how to accomplish this or could critique my design. The UI would look similar to the WPS Request Builder, the back end would be a bpel process chaining together the servic

[Geoserver-devel] GeoServer 2.3-RC1 Released

The GeoServer team is happy to announce the release of GeoServer 2.3-RC1: http://geoserver.org/display/GEOS/GeoServer+2.3-RC1 Check out the blog for all the details: http://blog.geoserver.org/2013/02/26/geoserver-2-3-rc1-released/ Thanks for using GeoServer! -- The GeoServer Community ---

Re: [Geoserver-devel] 2.2.5 release

Thanks Mauro. On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 7:40 AM, Mauro Bartolomeoli < mauro.bartolome...@geo-solutions.it> wrote: > Hi everybody. > > I think the release is now complete, except: > * documentation update: I think someone with access to opengeo servers is > needed, can anyone of OpenGeo complete th

Re: [Geoserver-devel] Some problems for 2.2.5 release

Hmmm I thought I recently fixed this issue. Looking at the geoserver-release-publish history i am not seing that build... was it deleted? Anyways it seems to have worked itself out? On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 5:15 AM, Mauro Bartolomeoli < mauro.bartolome...@geo-solutions.it> wrote: > The geoser

[Geoserver-devel] 2.2.5 release

Hi everybody. I think the release is now complete, except: * documentation update: I think someone with access to opengeo servers is needed, can anyone of OpenGeo complete this task? * announcements on SourceForge, SlashGeo, FreeGIS, FreshMeat: I don't have accounts on these sites; can someone e

[Geoserver-devel] GeoServer 2.2.5 released

The GeoServer team is happy to announce the release of GeoServer 2.2.5, now available for download. This is the latest release of the stable 2.2 series. The changes that might interest the most users are: * Errors are not thrown anymore when a gridset is added to geowebcache.xml and geoserver

[Geoserver-devel] Some problems for 2.2.5 release

The geoserver-release-publish is currently giving this error: Started by user hudson [workspace] $ /bin/sh -xe /var/cache/jetty/data/hudson7528167848804124322.sh + set -x + git checkout master warning: unable to rmdir build/geowebcache/master/83b284b341ef25fe89adf2eb7858991defa64e57: Directory not

[Geoserver-devel] 2.3-RC1 Minor Letter Bug

Hi List, In the german translation the letter ä,ö,ü are published as “�” etc. Best regards Michael Räder __ Michael Räder Nationalpark-Verwaltung Niedersächsisches Wattenmeer Virchowstr. 1 / 26382 Wilhelmshaven Tel.: +49 (0) 4421 911 295 / Fax

Re: [Geoserver-devel] 2.2.5 status

> Artifacts are up and available to test out at: > > http://gridlock.opengeo.org/geoserver/release/2.2.5/ > > If someone could do some more testing, in particular for the mac installers. Had a chance to check the above out (windows 7) no problems encountered - was mostly testing with PostGIS

Re: [Geoserver-devel] 2.2.5 status

2013/2/25 Justin Deoliveira > Sure, no problem. Although since Andrea actually updated the 2.3-RC1 blog > post to add some actual meat to it i am thinking it warrants its own post. > But i am fine either way, just let me know. > > Ok, I think we can go for separate posts. Thank you. Mauro -- =