Re: [JPP-Devel] jts 1.15 vs 1.14 Was:Re: OpenJUMP next version

On 04.04.2018 10:07, Giuseppe Aruta wrote: > This means we have to rewrite all the code of OpenJUMP before modifing > external plugins. correct. and we are done with that, all the extensions, because they wont work anymore. sticking to 1.14 for the time being (as Mike suggested) sounds like a

Re: [JPP-Devel] jts 1.15 vs 1.14 Was:Re: OpenJUMP next version

Jucca, Michaël, Ede I am working to upgrade CadPlan Jump Chart (mostly added Spanish and Italian language files). I did a tets to migrate that plugin to JTS 1.15. I download the file here: https://github.com/locationtech/jts/releases and configured build path. I had problem with*

Re: [JPP-Devel] jts 1.15 vs 1.14 Was:Re: OpenJUMP next version

https://osgeo-org.atlassian.net/browse/GEOT-5954 Discussion in GeoTools list about migrating. There is an interesting note about Jai-ext depency on Jts 2018-04-03 17:28 GMT+02:00 Michaël Michaud : > Hi, > > I can't think of a good solution to migrate without pain. >

Re: [JPP-Devel] jts 1.15 vs 1.14 Was:Re: OpenJUMP next version

Hi, I can't think of a good solution to migrate without pain. There is no hurry to migrate and we can probably make one more OJ release with JTS 1.14. I'm curious to see how bigger projects like Geotools, deegree, hale, udig... will manage this change. On the other hand, JTS is one of the

Re: [JPP-Devel] jts 1.15 vs 1.14 Was:Re: OpenJUMP next version

s 1.15 vs 1.14 Was:Re: OpenJUMP next version It sounds like a lot of job for OpenJUMP. What about to write to LocationTech and show the difficulties for such changes? Is Martin Davis still involved into the JTS project? Peppe 2018-04-03 13:50 GMT+02:00 <edgar.sol...@web.de<mailto:edgar.s

Re: [JPP-Devel] jts 1.15 vs 1.14 Was:Re: OpenJUMP next version

On 03.04.2018 14:12, Giuseppe Aruta wrote: > It sounds like a lot of job for OpenJUMP. it will be, for us as well as for all the other jts implementing projects. it would be really interesting, if there is a kind of - we will stick to the old, it's stable enough - attitude out there. > What

Re: [JPP-Devel] jts 1.15 vs 1.14 Was:Re: OpenJUMP next version

It sounds like a lot of job for OpenJUMP. What about to write to LocationTech and show the difficulties for such changes? Is Martin Davis still involved into the JTS project? Peppe 2018-04-03 13:50 GMT+02:00 : > hey All, > > had a look at it over the course of the last weeks

[JPP-Devel] jts 1.15 vs 1.14 Was:Re: OpenJUMP next version

hey All, had a look at it over the course of the last weeks and couldn't find a one size fit's all solution. there are solution that allow us to map the package, but then we still have to deal with the return types of methods, which is going to be a lot of work. with that information i'd