Hi Niels,
that's excellent, then I guess it's time to make the PRs moving the modules
up.
Cheers
Andrea
On Mon, May 16, 2022 at 2:31 PM Niels Charlier wrote:
> Hello Jody,
>
> Timothy and I worked on this project together for the same organisation
> (DOV); I believe they are the only ones who
That is great, indeed an ideal outcome, thank you for resolving this Niels.
--
Jody Garnett
On May 16, 2022 at 5:31:22 AM, Niels Charlier wrote:
> Hello Jody,
>
> Timothy and I worked on this project together for the same organisation
> (DOV); I believe they are the only ones who own the
Hello Jody,
Timothy and I worked on this project together for the same organisation
(DOV); I believe they are the only ones who own the copyrights on the code.
The problem has been completely resolved now; DOV has signed and
submitted the CLA for the modules that were contributed to
Niels the trouble is one of the contributors does not have a CLA on file
with OSGeo. We need to look up this individuals name so we can stop being
vague on this topic.
@author Timothy De Bock - timothy.debock.git...@gmail.com
So if you want you can update the headers to say (based on Timothy's
On 10/05/2022 11:24, Andrea Aime wrote:
"found code" is for code that is license compatible, but for which we
have no CLA on record, meaning we cannot mix it with other code that
might
be donated back to GeoTools or otherwise relicensed at a later stage.
So the module needs to be labelled and
On Tue, May 10, 2022 at 9:16 AM Niels Charlier wrote:
> Hello Andrea,
>
> Indeed, he contributed as part of the same project. I don't know if he
> signed, I could check but I understand we need to get the organization to
> sign anyway, does it then still matter if they do?
>
> About the "found
<mailto:geoserver-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>
*Aihe:* Re: [Geoserver-devel] proposals:
promote metadata and csw-iso to extensions
Hello everyone,
So if I get it right GSIP-311 has suffi
gt;>> Andrea
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, Apr 23, 2022 at 3:02 PM Niels Charlier via Geoserver-devel <
>>>> geoserver-devel@lists.sourceforge.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Thank you, Jukka!
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>&g
ve both proposals have passed.
>>>>
>>>> Cheers
>>>> Andrea
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, Apr 23, 2022 at 3:02 PM Niels Charlier via Geoserver-devel <
>>>> geoserver-devel@lists.sourceforge.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
<mailto:geoserver-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>
*Aihe:* Re: [Geoserver-devel] proposals: promote
metadata and csw-iso to extensions
Hello everyone,
So if I get it right GSIP-311 has sufficient votes
(
lt;mailto:jody.garn...@gmail.com>
*Kopio:* Geoserver-devel
<mailto:geoserver-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>
*Aihe:* Re: [Geoserver-devel] proposals: promote
metadata and csw-iso to extensions
-devel <
>>> geoserver-devel@lists.sourceforge.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Thank you, Jukka!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Can I assume then that the absent votes are +0 and that both proposals
>>>> are accepted?
>>>>
>>>>
urceforge.net>
*Lähetetty:* torstai 21. huhtikuuta 2022 12.01
*Vastaanottaja:* Jody Garnett
<mailto:jody.garn...@gmail.com>
*Kopio:* Geoserver-devel
<mailto:geoserver-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>
*Aihe:* Re: [Geoserv
gt; On 21/04/2022 12:39, Rahkonen Jukka (MML) wrote:
>>>
>>> +1 for both GSIP-311 and GSIP-312.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -Jukka Rahkonen-
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *Lähettäjä:* Niels Charlier via Geoserver-devel
>>>
>>
<mailto:geoserver-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>
*Aihe:* Re: [Geoserver-devel] proposals: promote metadata and
csw-iso to extensions
Hello everyone,
So if I get it right GSIP-311 has sufficient votes (three +1,
no -1), but GSIP-312 doesn't (n
Regards
>>
>> Niels
>> On 21/04/2022 12:39, Rahkonen Jukka (MML) wrote:
>>
>> +1 for both GSIP-311 and GSIP-312.
>>
>>
>>
>> -Jukka Rahkonen-
>>
>>
>>
>> *Lähettäjä:* Niels Charlier via Geoserver-devel
>>
>>
>&g
;
>>
>> *Lähettäjä:* Niels Charlier via Geoserver-devel
>>
>>
>> *Lähetetty:* torstai 21. huhtikuuta 2022 12.01
>> *Vastaanottaja:* Jody Garnett
>>
>> *Kopio:* Geoserver-devel
>>
>> *Aihe:* Re: [Geoserver-devel] proposals: promot
1/04/2022 12:39, Rahkonen Jukka (MML) wrote:
>
> +1 for both GSIP-311 and GSIP-312.
>
>
>
> -Jukka Rahkonen-
>
>
>
> *Lähettäjä:* Niels Charlier via Geoserver-devel
>
>
> *Lähetetty:* torstai 21. huhtikuuta 2022 12.01
> *Vastaanottaja:* Jody Garnett
>
:* torstai 21. huhtikuuta 2022 12.01
*Vastaanottaja:* Jody Garnett
*Kopio:* Geoserver-devel
*Aihe:* Re: [Geoserver-devel] proposals: promote metadata and csw-iso
to extensions
Hello everyone,
So if I get it right GSIP-311 has sufficient votes (three +1, no -1),
but GSIP-312 doesn't (no -1
+1 for both GSIP-311 and GSIP-312.
-Jukka Rahkonen-
Lähettäjä: Niels Charlier via Geoserver-devel
Lähetetty: torstai 21. huhtikuuta 2022 12.01
Vastaanottaja: Jody Garnett
Kopio: Geoserver-devel
Aihe: Re: [Geoserver-devel] proposals: promote metadata and csw-iso to
extensions
Hello
Hello everyone,
So if I get it right GSIP-311 has sufficient votes (three +1, no -1),
but GSIP-312 doesn't (no -1, but only two +1). Does anyone else still
want to add a vote?
Kind Regards
Niels
On 05/04/2022 05:42, Jody Garnett wrote:
Hey Niels!
Not quite sure I understand the CLA
Hello Mats,
That is because geoserver by default doesn't have any metadata fields
for storing dates of creation and modification.
This is where the metadata module comes in handy. There you can add
unlimited amount of date fields to your layer and configure them with
UI. It also provides
Hi Niels! Aim high, hit low.
There seems to be no disagreement on your original proposal, and I also
believe that the bug here lies in the documentation. And trust me, I'd be
happy to contribute a working setup if I could manage to put one together.
My goal is to publish geodata on Geoserver and
Hello Mats and Richard,
Thank you for your feedback. I hear two signals from you:
(1) there is demand for the functionality of these modules;
(2) they are currently too hard to deploy and configure, or in other
words there is demand for better support.
Considering these points I think it
Agreed please do not dump inspire stuff into GeoServer :)
If you would like an easy to install bundle, help contribute to the
community docker activity, or make a predefined way with the
modules/extensions included.
--
Jody Garnett
On Apr 9, 2022 at 6:43:35 PM, Brad Hards wrote:
> On
On Saturday, 9 April 2022 7:10:55 PM AEST Mats Elfström wrote:
> But I would like to propose an even bolder approach. To me, CSW, Metadata
> and ISO-INSPIRE are parts of a whole and would perhaps be easier to
> install, configure and maintain if combined into a single extension?
I accept that
Agree metadata is indeed hard, and not all of the record formats have the
ability to add custom fields (because that would be a new profile to
document the fields):
- Do not make a new profile (unless you are a national government etc...)
- That means you do not make custom fields
- Choose a
Hi List,
My 1c: fully agree with Mats, being somebody getting cold when hearing
'metadata' and 'csw' in one sentence, I was still eager to try to test this in
geoserver, hoping I could make this work as csw in QGIS...
But I failed miserably too (even asked mr Geonetwork for help), because of
Hi! My 2c on this proposal.
I have been struggling trying to make use of Geoserver as a metadata
repository and source for published geodata. With no success. Even a
vanilla installation, using unaltered sample configuration files, fails to
generate any output that Geonetwork harvester will
Hi Simone,
Thanks for your vote. Yes I am available for all questions regarding the
modules and general maintenance as required or requested by the PSC .
Kind Regards
Niels
On 06/04/2022 15:49, Simone Giannecchini wrote:
Hi Niels,
I'd say +1 as we use at least CSW quite a lot ourselves.
I
Hi Jody,
You answered the question. Good to hear that you see no problem. They
are willing to sign, but they just can't figure out who specifically
should sign it, lol.
Kind Regards
Niels
On 05/04/2022 05:42, Jody Garnett wrote:
Hey Niels!
Not quite sure I understand the CLA question; if
+0, I don't have experience in using those modules.
On Thu, Apr 7, 2022 at 8:29 AM Ian Turton wrote:
> +1
>
> Ian
>
> On Mon, 4 Apr 2022 at 12:50, Niels Charlier via Geoserver-devel <
> geoserver-devel@lists.sourceforge.net> wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> I have written up two proposals to promote
+1
Ian
On Mon, 4 Apr 2022 at 12:50, Niels Charlier via Geoserver-devel <
geoserver-devel@lists.sourceforge.net> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I have written up two proposals to promote community modules "metadata"
> and "csw-iso" to extensions.
>
> https://github.com/geoserver/geoserver/wiki/GSIP-311
>
>
Hi Niels,
+1 on the CSW proposal, the code used to be in extension.
+0 on the metadata module, not because I have issues with it, but just
because I cannot answer the question of whether "I can consider it stable",
having never used it or looked into it.
Cheers
Andrea
On Mon, Apr 4, 2022 at
Hi Niels,
I'd say +1 as we use at least CSW quite a lot ourselves.
I am assuming you are also stepping up to supporting people's questions on
the ML and keeping the modules following the general GeoServer development.
Regards,
Simone Giannecchini
==
Professional Support for GeoNode, GeoServer
Hey Niels!
Not quite sure I understand the CLA question; if you did the work on behalf
of a particular government department and had their permission/authority to
donate to OSGeo then you should be good. If you are really interested in
being careful you could ask the manager (whoever paid you or
Hello,
I have written up two proposals to promote community modules "metadata"
and "csw-iso" to extensions.
https://github.com/geoserver/geoserver/wiki/GSIP-311
https://github.com/geoserver/geoserver/wiki/GSIP-312
I believe stability, test coverage, users, are all okay. Please discuss.
One
37 matches
Mail list logo
