Compatibility with geonetwork 3.0.x
|Status:||Request For Comments||Start date:||08/22/2013|
|Assignee:||Technical Committee||% Done:|
Geonetwork 3.x has changed its authentication method and added a dedicated service for transactions : geonetwork/srv/eng/csw-publication
EasySDI has evolve to be compatible with this new version.
#4 Updated by Mérour Xavier over 6 years ago
According to what we have seen, there are two different aspect of this issue :
1. Geonetwork now implement a new authentication method
2. Geonetwork has splitted its CSW into two different : one for "read-only access" and one for "publication/transaction".
In conclusion, to work with this last version, EasySDI has to evolve on those two aspects.
#5 Updated by Magoni Bruno about 6 years ago
In the meantime, easySDI should change the current authenticating's way and switch it from the PROXY servlet to the CATALOG php side.
It will remove the absolute need of deploying a JAVA servlet to use easySDI.
A question is also about keeping previous authentication method for geonetwrok versions equals or lesser than 2.6.4
#10 Updated by Mérour Xavier over 5 years ago
- Assignee set to Portier Thomas
In its last meeting, the PSC decided to wait for geonetwork version 3.0 tp make adaptation in easySDI (since 3.0 will be the next major GN release https://github.com/geonetwork/core-geonetwork/wiki/Roadmap-GeoNetwork-3.0).
Making intermediate effort with lower versions would certainly be lost with the upcoming version.
#11 Updated by Portier Thomas over 5 years ago
Do we have a date of this 3.0 release? Isn't it risky to rely on the first version of a major release (3.0)?
The 2.10 has been tested for more than 1 year.
An other bug found on the 2.6.4 : [[http://sourceforge.net/p/geonetwork/mailman/message/27609028/]]
You have to install the 2.6.3 if you want the search to be fully functional.
#13 Updated by Magoni Bruno almost 5 years ago
- Subject changed from Compatibility with geonetwork 2.10 to Compatibility with geonetwork 2.10.x / 3.0.x
- Status changed from New to Request For Comments
- Assignee changed from Portier Thomas to Technical Committee
Regarding Geonetwork roadmap https://github.com/geonetwork/core-geonetwork/releases, I propose that TC discuss about how embracing migration under 2.10.x OR/AND 3.0.x
#15 Updated by Van Hoecke Hélène over 4 years ago
- Status changed from Request For Comments to Request For Votes
- Assignee changed from Technical Committee to Steering Committee
- Functional impact set to -
- Ergonomic impact set to none
With the fixed bugs proposed by the v3 (specifically on harvesting), the migration should be now put on the schedule.
#16 Updated by Mérour Xavier over 4 years ago
- Assignee changed from Steering Committee to Technical Committee
PSC decides not to put any effort on Geonetwork 3.0 BUT, instead, have in mind the developpment of an "easySDI inernal CSW engine" which will be "lighter" and "easyier" to deploy than GN.
Next step : organize a tech workshop on the question to draw the architecture of this engine. Each partner will think about it internally to come with inputs for the workshop.
Target : beginning of october 2015
#19 Updated by Van Hoecke Hélène over 4 years ago
Informations given during TC meeting :
- Version negociation is not possible from easySDI service configuration because GN3 only support GetCapabilities in POST. This must be a GN3 bug, because CSW specifications required GetCapabilities in HTTP GET. Work around is : use a preexisting physical service, change the url and authentication informations, but don't perform negociation on it.
- GN3 uses HTTP Basic authentication, we do not need to use anymore the specific provider authentication mecanism
- Conclusion is : some few days are required to adapt easySDI to the new GN3 specificities, but it can be use as it is.
TC members have proposed following topics to be discussed :
- CSW search enhancements :
- Faceted search
- search autocompletion
- multi-criteria search
- Extraction features (ASIT-VD)
- Roadmap easySDI:
- Monitor + services?
#23 Updated by Blatti Yves about 3 years ago
- Subject changed from Compatibility with geonetwork 2.10.x / 3.0.x to Compatibility with geonetwork 3.0.x