[Geoserver-devel] Omitting service=wfs from a KVP WFS 2.0 request has unpredictable results

We've been down this road already with the version number, also required, not mandated by GeoServer in its default configuration, and causing occasional failures in kvp parsing when omitted.
I did not check, but I'd guess that service omission might be the same.

Feel free to ignore if it's a dumb suggestion, but would it make sense to configure warnings to be written to the log for when not-required-but-dangerous-to-omit parameters aren't sent? This might give developers a hint about what they've done wrong without killing their chances of getting a response when they're "lucky" enough for Geoserver to send a response anyway.

- Patrick O'Toole

Application Developer
Wyoming Natural Diversity Database
UW Berry Biodiversity Conservation Center
Department 3381, 1000 E. University Av.
Laramie, WY 82071
P: 307-766-3018

On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 5:25 PM, P O'Toole <P.OToole@anonymised.com> wrote:

Feel free to ignore if it's a dumb suggestion, but would it make sense to
configure warnings to be written to the log for when
not-required-but-dangerous-to-omit parameters aren't sent? This might
give developers a hint about what they've done wrong without killing their
chances of getting a response when they're "lucky" enough for Geoserver to
send a response anyway.

It would make a lot of sense for a local developer that's looking at the
logs, someone that owns both the server and the client dev side. That's
common in very small dev shops, but I guess in larger ones the server is
managed by someone else? Still someone might notice the logs.

However, on a production server that would generate a truckload of
warnings... we have a standing request to get exactly the opposite and
don't log at high level errors related to plainly invalid requests, such as
asking for a layer that's not there. Hard to please everybody... (or else,
the amount of configuration required to get the desired control would put
this into a "sponsored feature" realm).

Cheers
Andrea

--

GeoServer Professional Services from the experts! Visit
http://goo.gl/it488V for more information.

Ing. Andrea Aime
@geowolf
Technical Lead

GeoSolutions S.A.S.
Via di Montramito 3/A
55054 Massarosa (LU)
phone: +39 0584 962313
fax: +39 0584 1660272
mob: +39 339 8844549

http://www.geo-solutions.it
http://twitter.com/geosolutions_it

*AVVERTENZE AI SENSI DEL D.Lgs. 196/2003*

Le informazioni contenute in questo messaggio di posta elettronica e/o
nel/i file/s allegato/i sono da considerarsi strettamente riservate. Il
loro utilizzo è consentito esclusivamente al destinatario del messaggio,
per le finalità indicate nel messaggio stesso. Qualora riceviate questo
messaggio senza esserne il destinatario, Vi preghiamo cortesemente di
darcene notizia via e-mail e di procedere alla distruzione del messaggio
stesso, cancellandolo dal Vostro sistema. Conservare il messaggio stesso,
divulgarlo anche in parte, distribuirlo ad altri soggetti, copiarlo, od
utilizzarlo per finalità diverse, costituisce comportamento contrario ai
principi dettati dal D.Lgs. 196/2003.

The information in this message and/or attachments, is intended solely for
the attention and use of the named addressee(s) and may be confidential or
proprietary in nature or covered by the provisions of privacy act
(Legislative Decree June, 30 2003, no.196 - Italy's New Data Protection
Code).Any use not in accord with its purpose, any disclosure, reproduction,
copying, distribution, or either dissemination, either whole or partial, is
strictly forbidden except previous formal approval of the named
addressee(s). If you are not the intended recipient, please contact
immediately the sender by telephone, fax or e-mail and delete the
information in this message that has been received in error. The sender
does not give any warranty or accept liability as the content, accuracy or
completeness of sent messages and accepts no responsibility for changes
made after they were sent or for other risks which arise as a result of
e-mail transmission, viruses, etc.

-------------------------------------------------------

It would make a lot of sense for a local developer that’s looking at the logs, someone that owns both the server and the client dev side. That’s common in very small dev shops

However, on a production server that would generate a truckload of warnings

That’s true. Although it’s easy enough to say “oh just add a configuration-option for that”, it’s probably prudent to be wary of that sort of configuration-bloat.

Hm. I’m wondering if there are libraries or APIs which might be able to do this separate from Geoserver.

  • Patrick