Alessio Fabiani ha scritto:
> Hi guys,
>
> I almost agree with you David, and also I think RESTConfig should not be
> included into 1.7.x release at least in this very incomplete state, but
> anyway it is a valid alternative to interact with GS catalog
> configuration ... so what I'm thinking i
Hi guys,
I almost agree with you David, and also I think RESTConfig should not be
included into 1.7.x release at least in this very incomplete state, but
anyway it is a valid alternative to interact with GS catalog configuration
... so what I'm thinking is that maybe we can distribute it as a GeoS
Wow, a lot to digest ;).
But I think in the end I agree with you. It does not seem to be a huge
win to spend a lot of time getting REST working on 1.7.x if we just have
to redo a lot of it for 2.0 anyways. Especially since its just going to
be something that ties us down as the api will be chan
Hi all,
As I'd like to be able to include RESTConfig in 1.7.0 when it comes out
I am trying to assess its current state and work out how much needs to
happen before it makes sense to consider it for inclusion. Right now it
provides configuration for datastores, coveragestores, featuretypes,
c
