Currently we have the ISO19115-3 schema in master as part of the branch and in 3.10.x still it’s a submodule.
This makes it difficult to cherry-pick commits from master involving changes to the ISO19115-3 schema. Some of the changes involve only code in that schema, so are quite isolated, but other changes also affect other modules making the backports a bit more complicated.
Are there any concerns about removing the ISO19115-3 submodule from 3.10.x and managing it as part of the branch as in master.
Currently we have the ISO19115-3 schema in master as part of the branch and in 3.10.x still it’s a submodule.
This makes it difficult to cherry-pick commits from master involving changes to the ISO19115-3 schema. Some of the changes involve only code in that schema, so are quite isolated, but other changes also affect other modules making the backports a bit more complicated.
Are there any concerns about removing the ISO19115-3 submodule from 3.10.x and managing it as part of the branch as in master.
Any chance we could change the schema version to 3.10.x while we do this? It would help allowing things like https://github.com/GeoCat/experiment-hnap to build straight from the maven repository without having to build geonetwork locally.
Nice, Jody is going to manage this for the 3.10.x branch, removing the submodule and copying the code for iso19115-3 from GeoNetwork master branch as it has been getting updates after the submodule was abandoned.
Reminder with this change I am reposting these instructions:
If you update with git pull you will get the following error:
From github.com:geonetwork/core-geonetwork * branch master → FETCH_HEAD = [up to date] master → upstream/master error: The following untracked working tree files would be overwritten by merge: schemas/iso19115-3.2018/ISO19115-3-2014-to-ISO19115-3-2018.xsl schemas/iso19115-3.2018/ISO19139-to-ISO19115-3-2018.xsl
