Re: [Geoserver-devel] Progress on community schemas/complex features

[Rob A. <ro...@so...>]

Edward Nash wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I e-mailed back in July asking a bit about the complex features and 
> community schema support. I've since managed to get an instance of the 
> complex_sco branch up and running and found out what it can (and 
> can't) do. From the wiki, e-mail lists and IRC logs I understand that 
> there's been some work been done on this which should be delivering 
> something sometime soon (I also see that there's a lot of background 
> changes in GeoTools & GeoServer required, so I'm wondering just what 
> has been accomplished in a relatively short time!).
>
> Basically I'd be interested to know whether there's going to be any 
> further developments going on the SVN server

there wont be any development on the complex_sco branch - its served its 
purpose and will be decommissioned. We have a funded projects half-way 
through to rebuild with geotools API enhancements.

Please update the wiki for the project with any additional requirements 
you think you have.

Gabriel Roldan and Jody Garnett are probably best place to recommend how 
participation in the coding might best be achieved, but I'd like to be 
in the loop for definition of functionality requirements.

Regards
Rob Atkinson
Social Change Online

> (or available elsewhere) soon, and what those developments are, before 
> we sit down here and start hacking away at what we've currently got 
> and end up with a completely exotic solution. We *may* also be able to 
> help contribute to some 'proper' development, particularly if there's 
> some relatively self-contained sections that help meet our needs (I've 
> identified 3 main functionality stumbling blocks in the current 
> complex_sco branch, at least one of which I've a feeling will be a 
> tricky one to sort out on the hacking-in-a-branch level) - but I don't 
> think anyone here has worked with GeoServer/Tools before, and big Java 
> project experience is also limited (but can no doubt be quickly learnt!).
>
> (also as an aside if any of the uDIG guys read this, I'd also be 
> interested to know plans for supporting complex GML in uDIG - but I 
> guess that's probably a bit tied to the required changes in GeoTools?)
>
> Thanks in advance for the replies.
>
> Ed Nash
>