Just a quick sanity check, but was the GDAL extension bundled with RC1? I see a bunch of jars called:
imageio-ext-gdal*.jar
and I'm positive I didn't install the GDAL extension on RC1, yet there those data sources are...
Thanks,
Mike Pumphrey
OpenGeo - http://opengeo.org
Mike Pumphrey ha scritto:
Just a quick sanity check, but was the GDAL extension bundled with RC1? I see a bunch of jars called:
imageio-ext-gdal*.jar
and I'm positive I didn't install the GDAL extension on RC1, yet there those data sources are...
The imageio-ext jars have been in the GeoServer release for quite some time, even in 1.7.x, as someone added them as a dependency to the mosaic
plugin, and by transitive means they ended up being a dependency for
the core GeoServer we're shipping.
I personally don't mind having them in core actually, since they won't activate until the correspondent native parts are included in the JDK/JRE running GeoServer. But it's just me, what do others think?
If we keep them we should amend the documentation as the extensions would be empty (not jars). I guess the download link should just point
to a doc page explaining what binaries to download from imageio-ext
project, and where to place them.
Cheers
Andrea
--
Andrea Aime
OpenGeo - http://opengeo.org
Expert service straight from the developers.
Hey Andrea. Personally, I would be fine with all of our extensions shipped as part of core, so I'm not complaining! 
But if GDAL jars are bundled with core, then we don't really need a GDAL extension, do we? I would say that we should not have a "blank" (no jar) extension, but just have better docs (which I am writing now)...
Thanks,
Mike Pumphrey
OpenGeo - http://opengeo.org
Andrea Aime wrote:
Mike Pumphrey ha scritto:
Just a quick sanity check, but was the GDAL extension bundled with RC1? I see a bunch of jars called:
imageio-ext-gdal*.jar
and I'm positive I didn't install the GDAL extension on RC1, yet there those data sources are...
The imageio-ext jars have been in the GeoServer release for quite some time, even in 1.7.x, as someone added them as a dependency to the mosaic
plugin, and by transitive means they ended up being a dependency for
the core GeoServer we're shipping.I personally don't mind having them in core actually, since they won't activate until the correspondent native parts are included in the JDK/JRE running GeoServer. But it's just me, what do others think?
If we keep them we should amend the documentation as the extensions would be empty (not jars). I guess the download link should just point
to a doc page explaining what binaries to download from imageio-ext
project, and where to place them.Cheers
Andrea
Mike Pumphrey ha scritto:
Hey Andrea. Personally, I would be fine with all of our extensions
shipped as part of core, so I'm not complaining!But if GDAL jars are bundled with core, then we don't really need a
GDAL extension, do we? I would say that we should not have a "blank"
(no jar) extension, but just have better docs (which I am writing
now)...
Yes and no. People need to know that in order to have GDAL supported
formats available they need to install some extras.
We don't list PostGIS among the datastore extensions because
it's core, you look into the "new datastore" list and find it.
But if we remove the GDAL link people might start to get confused,
it's not there in the "new coverage" list, it's not among the
downloads.. uuuh... has it been dropped? Is it not working?
An acceptable compromise is keep the link in the downloads,
but turn it into a link to the docs one needs to read in order
to complete the GDAL installation instead.
Cheers
Andrea
--
Andrea Aime
OpenGeo - http://opengeo.org
Expert service straight from the developers.
Okay, sure. Nitpicky question: Do we have the actual link on the downloads page point to an online doc, or do we have a zip file containing just a README?
Thanks,
Mike Pumphrey
OpenGeo - http://opengeo.org
Andrea Aime wrote:
Mike Pumphrey ha scritto:
Hey Andrea. Personally, I would be fine with all of our extensions
shipped as part of core, so I'm not complaining!But if GDAL jars are bundled with core, then we don't really need a
GDAL extension, do we? I would say that we should not have a "blank"
(no jar) extension, but just have better docs (which I am writing
now)...Yes and no. People need to know that in order to have GDAL supported
formats available they need to install some extras.
We don't list PostGIS among the datastore extensions because
it's core, you look into the "new datastore" list and find it.
But if we remove the GDAL link people might start to get confused,
it's not there in the "new coverage" list, it's not among the
downloads.. uuuh... has it been dropped? Is it not working?An acceptable compromise is keep the link in the downloads,
but turn it into a link to the docs one needs to read in order
to complete the GDAL installation instead.Cheers
Andrea
Mike Pumphrey ha scritto:
Okay, sure. Nitpicky question: Do we have the actual link on the downloads page point to an online doc, or do we have a zip file containing just a README?
I would just link to the docs, instead of having a README that
links to the docs (which is what we have today).
Cheers
Andrea
--
Andrea Aime
OpenGeo - http://opengeo.org
Expert service straight from the developers.
Okay.
http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/GEOS-3389
Thanks,
Mike Pumphrey
OpenGeo - http://opengeo.org
Andrea Aime wrote:
Mike Pumphrey ha scritto:
Okay, sure. Nitpicky question: Do we have the actual link on the downloads page point to an online doc, or do we have a zip file containing just a README?
I would just link to the docs, instead of having a README that
links to the docs (which is what we have today).Cheers
Andrea