Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Migration guide: DUMP shouldn't be needed in OGC request #3830

Closed
mapserver-bot opened this issue Apr 4, 2012 · 12 comments
Closed

Migration guide: DUMP shouldn't be needed in OGC request #3830

mapserver-bot opened this issue Apr 4, 2012 · 12 comments
Assignees
Labels
Milestone

Comments

@mapserver-bot
Copy link

Reporter: aboudreault
Date: 2011/04/12 - 14:03
Trac URL: http://trac.osgeo.org/mapserver/ticket/3830
The dump keyword was used to determine what layers was queryable or could be displayed in a few OGC requests. With the implementation of the RFC 67, we don't need it anymore.

@mapserver-bot
Copy link
Author

Author: aboudreault
Date: 2011/04/12 - 14:43
Fixed and committed in 21a1edc (r11544). The mapfile keyword still exists. Reopen the ticket if we decide to remove the mapfile keyword also.

@mapserver-bot
Copy link
Author

Author: dmorissette
Date: 2011/09/29 - 14:03
Reopening: this change needs to be mentioned in the 6.0 migration guide and all relevant docs need to be updated (all docs that used to refer to DUMP keyword)

@mapserver-bot
Copy link
Author

Author: dmorissette
Date: 2011/09/29 - 14:04
Moving to docs component. Any taker?

@mapserver-bot
Copy link
Author

Author: havatv
Date: 2011/09/29 - 14:24
I can start.

@mapserver-bot
Copy link
Author

Author: havatv
Date: 2011/09/29 - 17:52
The 6.0 and trunk documentation has been updated in MapServer/MapServer-documentation@4fe6fcb (r12604).

I have added deprecation notes in the layer and mapscript documents. In the rest of the documents I have removed
DUMP true
from the examples. I guess that for the examples to make sense, some metadata has to be added. I have included some, but please check and file bugs where more is needed.

@mapserver-bot
Copy link
Author

Author: havatv
Date: 2011/09/29 - 18:22
Added some more enable_request metadata in MapServer/MapServer-documentation@655e3a0 (r12605).

@mapserver-bot
Copy link
Author

Author: havatv
Date: 2011/09/30 - 08:33
I forgot the migration guide. I don't think I can edit the migration guide, so perhaps Daniel can do that?

@mapserver-bot
Copy link
Author

Author: havatv
Date: 2011/11/08 - 23:14
Since I don't think I can edit the migration guide, I reassign this one to Daniel.

@ghost ghost assigned dmorissette Apr 5, 2012
@tbonfort
Copy link
Member

@havatv would you be willing to update the migration guide if you had commit rights ?

@havatv
Copy link

havatv commented May 24, 2012

@tbonfort, I have not yet had the time to get used to working with git. I still feel quite unsure when I sporadically work with git on the documentation, and I would not be comfortable with having the possibility to cause damage to the Mapserver code due to lack of git competence. I will need to allocate some time for familiarising myself with git before I can continue to contribute to Mapserver documentation the way I used to do when we were on svn/trac.

@tbonfort
Copy link
Member

tbonfort commented Jun 9, 2012

pushed to 6-0 (3ef03d9) and master (0d0a240)

@tbonfort tbonfort closed this as completed Jun 9, 2012
@tbonfort tbonfort reopened this Sep 26, 2012
@tbonfort
Copy link
Member

DUMP is not just deprecated, it is completely unused. This should be made clear in the docs, and the layerObj->dump property should be removed from the code.

havatv pushed a commit to MapServer/MapServer-documentation that referenced this issue Sep 26, 2012
havatv pushed a commit to MapServer/MapServer-documentation that referenced this issue Sep 26, 2012
havatv pushed a commit to MapServer/MapServer-documentation that referenced this issue Sep 26, 2012
havatv pushed a commit to MapServer/MapServer-documentation that referenced this issue Sep 26, 2012
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants