You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@sis.apache.org by Johann Sorel <jo...@geomatys.com> on 2023/11/29 16:19:50 UTC

Shapefile major update, should we remove the previous code ?

Hello,

A first version of shapefile DataStore is close, it has :
- read and write support.
- implements the WritableFeatureSet API from SIS.
- basic bounding box filtering optimization.
- two levels of API (as requested by Apache Baremaps 
https://github.com/apache/incubator-baremaps/discussions/805) to have 
raw access to dbf and shp readers and writers.

I hope to finish this store in the coming weeks.

A question remain : What should we do with the previous shapefile store ?
As far as I know it is not used.
And it does not make use of any  of the SIS API (Feature, Filter, 
Resource) but instead it has a JDBC implementation.
If a real JDBC connector is needed I believe it would be better to 
create a generic calcite implementation above FeatureSet.

Should I remove the previous code ?

Thanks

Johann Sorel

Re: Shapefile major update, should we remove the previous code ?

Posted by Johann Sorel <jo...@geomatys.com>.
Hello again,

No answers so far, I've been informed by martin that several questions 
in the past on shapefile where left unanswered too.
With the obvious lack of interest in the old code and without any active 
maintainer I will start cleaning the codebase.

Thank you.

Johann Sorel

Le 29/11/2023 à 17:19, Johann Sorel a écrit :
> Hello,
>
> A first version of shapefile DataStore is close, it has :
> - read and write support.
> - implements the WritableFeatureSet API from SIS.
> - basic bounding box filtering optimization.
> - two levels of API (as requested by Apache Baremaps 
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-baremaps/discussions/805) to have 
> raw access to dbf and shp readers and writers.
>
> I hope to finish this store in the coming weeks.
>
> A question remain : What should we do with the previous shapefile store ?
> As far as I know it is not used.
> And it does not make use of any  of the SIS API (Feature, Filter, 
> Resource) but instead it has a JDBC implementation.
> If a real JDBC connector is needed I believe it would be better to 
> create a generic calcite implementation above FeatureSet.
>
> Should I remove the previous code ?
>
> Thanks
>
> Johann Sorel
>