Re: [Geotools-devel] proposal to move jdbc-ng to supported

[Andrea A. <aa...@op...>]

Justin Deoliveira ha scritto:
> Here it is:
> 
> It was actually already started, I just had to tweak it a bit.
> 
> http://docs.codehaus.org/display/GEOTOOLS/Next+Generation+JDBC+DataStore
> 
> It is more or less ready for voting, which I think at this point is just 
> a formality.

I'm +1, but there are a few little things that are not fully ok and
that I hope we can sort out quickly:
* dbtype: postgisng and oracleng. What should we do about those?
   The names were set so that we can have old and new postgis in the
   same container without creating a mess. And it is still needed today,
   e.g., if you want to have versioning and postgisng in the same
   classpath, as versioning depends on the old postgis.
   I guess a more future proof dbtype could be postgis2, oracle2
* postgisng still has a functional regression compared to postgis,
   lack of ability to use estimated extents:
   http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/GEOT-2572
   My fault, I need to cook up a patch, will try to do soon (I don't
   consider it a blocker for graduation)
* the proposal does not say what the contents of unsupported/jdbc will
   be (is it a copy of the old library/jdbc, or that is kept there
   and deprecated)

Cheers
Andrea


-- 
Andrea Aime
OpenGeo - http://opengeo.org
Expert service straight from the developers.