It's bee a while too, no objections, so yeah (imho, but I don't remember
the rules by heart)
Cheers
Andrea
On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 6:40 PM, Torben Barsballe <
tbarsba...@boundlessgeo.com> wrote:
> Now that this has gotten at least 50% +1's, are we good to merge? PR is
> here:
Now that this has gotten at least 50% +1's, are we good to merge? PR is
here: https://github.com/geoserver/geoserver/pull/2101
Torben
On Tue, Apr 4, 2017 at 10:30 AM, Kevin Smith wrote:
> On 2017-03-20 09:09 AM, Torben Barsballe wrote:
>
> This was initially proposed just
+1 from me
Ian
On 21 March 2017 at 09:50, Andrea Aime wrote:
> Thanks for the clarification
> +1 then :-)
>
> Cheers
> Andrea
>
> On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 6:31 PM, Torben Barsballe <
> tbarsba...@boundlessgeo.com> wrote:
>
>> I took a look, and none of the changes
Thanks for the clarification
+1 then :-)
Cheers
Andrea
On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 6:31 PM, Torben Barsballe <
tbarsba...@boundlessgeo.com> wrote:
> I took a look, and none of the changes are strictly backwards-compatible
>
> The changes to CatalogPostModifyEvent are changes to a public interface.
+1. Seems necessary, and the changes are not too intrusive.
Kind regards,
Ben.
On 21/03/17 05:09, Torben Barsballe wrote:
> This was initially proposed just prior to the 2.11-beta release, but did
> not make it in in time.
> Re-opening for discussion and voting now that the code freeze has
I took a look, and none of the changes are strictly backwards-compatible
The changes to CatalogPostModifyEvent are changes to a public interface.
The changes to AbstractCatalogFacade are protected, but will affect
anything extending AbstractCatalogFacade.
Everything else is mostly just
Hi Torben,
it would help, imho, if the proposal separated the API changes that are
actual backwards incompatible ones.
E.g., adding method to the event class is not an API break at all.
Makes easier to argue that the changes are isolated in places that are not
really meant to be implemented
This was initially proposed just prior to the 2.11-beta release, but did
not make it in in time.
Re-opening for discussion and voting now that the code freeze has ended.
Refer to https://github.com/geoserver/geoserver/wiki/GSIP-157
This proposal is to update the CatalogPostModifyEvent (and
Given the lack of feedback, I think I will defer this until after the code
freeze, aiming for the 2.12 release.
The CatalogFacade changes are only likely to affect alternative catalog
implementations. Given that this is something that probably should have
been included in the initial
Hi Torben,
sorry I lost track of this one, too many things going on.
I too got bitten by this limitation of the API, and while it breaks an
interface,
I'm not aware of an easy way to plug a different Catalog implementation, so
I guess all
current implementation are actually inside the GeoServer
Torben have you gotten any feedback? Is this in for tomorrows release ...
I do not see this as a risky change; adding a new event notification does
not have any backwards compatibility concerns.
--
Jody Garnett
On 10 February 2017 at 10:22, Torben Barsballe
wrote:
Continuing from earlier discussion, a GSIP is required in order for this
change to actually get into GeoServer, see:
https://github.com/geoserver/geoserver/wiki/GSIP-157
This proposal is to update the CatalogPostModifyEvent (and associated
firePostModifed methods) to track changed values, similar
12 matches
Mail list logo