Hi all,
the recent Hudson build breakages on trunk are due to changes in the
deployed Geoapi 2.3-SNAPSHOT. GeoTools is already locked down to 2.3-M1,
I've changed the pom files to follow suit.
Opinions?
Cheers
Andrea
--
Andrea Aime
OpenGeo - http://opengeo.org
Expert service straight from the developers.
Thanks Andrea - I assumed geoserver was getting a transitive dependency. My bad.
Can we get a transitive dependency on this one? I have been looking at
the changes to 2.3 (and tried releasing a SNAPSHOT and a 2.3-M2).
jody
On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 2:43 AM, Andrea Aime<aaime@anonymised.com> wrote:
Hi all,
the recent Hudson build breakages on trunk are due to changes in the
deployed Geoapi 2.3-SNAPSHOT. GeoTools is already locked down to 2.3-M1,
I've changed the pom files to follow suit.
Opinions?Cheers
Andrea--
Andrea Aime
OpenGeo - http://opengeo.org
Expert service straight from the developers.------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Enter the BlackBerry Developer Challenge
This is your chance to win up to $100,000 in prizes! For a limited time,
vendors submitting new applications to BlackBerry App World(TM) will have
the opportunity to enter the BlackBerry Developer Challenge. See full prize
details at: http://p.sf.net/sfu/Challenge
_______________________________________________
Geoserver-devel mailing list
Geoserver-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel
Jody Garnett ha scritto:
Thanks Andrea - I assumed geoserver was getting a transitive dependency. My bad.
Can we get a transitive dependency on this one? I have been looking at
the changes to 2.3 (and tried releasing a SNAPSHOT and a 2.3-M2).
Hmmm... I guess we could? Any objections?
Cheers
Andrea
--
Andrea Aime
OpenGeo - http://opengeo.org
Expert service straight from the developers.
If it helps I do not plan on changing the geotools dependency
randomly. Have been monitoring the changes (we are a couple milestone
releases behind) and so far they have been minor. It looks like some
attention will be paid to coverage interfaces shortly; and I have
asked that to be held off until the next geoapi milestone (due in a
couple of days).
Jody
On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 6:20 PM, Andrea Aime<aaime@anonymised.com> wrote:
Jody Garnett ha scritto:
Thanks Andrea - I assumed geoserver was getting a transitive dependency.
My bad.Can we get a transitive dependency on this one? I have been looking at
the changes to 2.3 (and tried releasing a SNAPSHOT and a 2.3-M2).Hmmm... I guess we could? Any objections?
Cheers
Andrea--
Andrea Aime
OpenGeo - http://opengeo.org
Expert service straight from the developers.
Jody Garnett ha scritto:
If it helps I do not plan on changing the geotools dependency
randomly. Have been monitoring the changes (we are a couple milestone
releases behind) and so far they have been minor. It looks like some
attention will be paid to coverage interfaces shortly; and I have
asked that to be held off until the next geoapi milestone (due in a
couple of days).
I have no objections on having GeoTools drive the GeoApi
change. With the current situation we risk (and it has happened) to
have them out of synch.
If no one else complains I'd just say to go ahead and commit the
change to the pom file.
Cheers
Andrea
--
Andrea Aime
OpenGeo - http://opengeo.org
Expert service straight from the developers.