Fwd: [gvSIG-devel] Why 2.x is not using geotools as data access layer?

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
1 message Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Fwd: [gvSIG-devel] Why 2.x is not using geotools as data access layer?

nachouve
Dear all,

Let me forward this email from the devel-list. As reported in the fork of "gvSIG-CE", some developers will try to use GeoTools to replace the data access layer to gvSIG 1.x branch. As you know, Geotools is a library that support many standards, formats and methods for processing spatial data. Geotools is widely used in other projects and it has a high level of development participation. IMHO, gvSIG can take many advantages of using Geotools, p.e. releasing a large load of programming, and benefit (and collaborate) with great community as is "Geotools / Geoserver".

I know the new gvSIG-2.0 has the main challenge of changing the data access (DAO) and that has some similarities with the Geotools one. I am sure that Geotools was discarded for good reasons at the time. Would it be possible to explain some of the reasons for that choice? Do you think that's crazy trying to make this work? Thank you!

Best regards,
Nacho V

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Fernando Gonzalez <[hidden email]>
Date: 2012/9/24
Subject: Re: [gvSIG-devel] Why 2.x is not using geotools as data access layer?
To: gvSIG developers mailing list <[hidden email]>


Hi, are there any plans to answer this question?

The codesprint will take place soon[1] and we're already doing some
developments about the integration. Any comment will sure be useful.

Regards.

[1] http://gvsigce.blogspot.de/2012/09/gvsig-ce-code-sprint-2012_4.html



On 10 August 2012 14:04, Fernando Gonzalez <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Hi, following a discussion in the gvSIG CE mailing lists I'm sharing
> here some of the plans we have in mind for the next CE code sprint in
> October.
>
> People attending the CE codesprint will try to replace gvSIG 1.x data
> access layer with geotools. The aim is not to replace it but to
> evaluate the feasibility and the necessary resources to succeed in
> such a task. You can follow the thread here[1].
>
> There are many people still investing on the development of the 1.x
> branch, while the 2.x branch is not yet ready for production. As far
> as I know there is no fixed date for that so I guess our experience
> may be interesting also for this community.
>
> At one moment, Nacho wisely suggested to ask the developers of 2.x
> line what were the reasons they had not to choose geotools as data
> access layer. Although 2.x requirements are sure more demanding than
> CE ones, I think it may be very useful to have that information.
>
> I've already talked informally with some of you in some conferences
> about this, but it would be interesting to have more formal
> discussion, so:
>
> Why did you discarded the idea of using geotools as data access layer?
>
>
>
> Best regards.
>
>
>
>
> [1] http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?thread_name=1344364298.29604.140661111905670.157B7DEF%40webmail.messagingengine.com&forum_name=gvsigce-devs

_______________________________________________
gvSIG-desktop-devel mailing list
http://joinup.ec.europa.eu/mailman/listinfo/gvsig-desktop-devel



--
Juan Ignacio Varela García



_______________________________________________
gvSIG-desktop-TSC-pub mailing list
http://joinup.ec.europa.eu/mailman/listinfo/gvsig-desktop-tsc-pub