[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: LDM JNI Interface

Hi Paul,

> From: Paul Hamer <address@hidden>
> Organization: NOAA/FSL
> Keywords: 200508102319.j7ANJ9jo027786 LDM Java JNI product queue

The above message contained the following:

> >Would Unidata be interested in a Java/JNI interface to the LDM product 
> >queue?

Interested?  Yes!  Unfortunately, however, there are so many things that
I *need* to do that I don't have time to do all the things I'd *like* to
do.

Can we work out an arrangement whereby the LDM webpages mention your
Java/JNI and C++ interfaces (with no promises from our end, of course
:-) and provide links to them on your server?  We've done this for other
packages and it seems to work well.

Alternatively, would you be interested in becoming an LDM developer
on our GForge site?

Regards,
Steve Emmerson

>From address@hidden  Fri Aug 19 14:35:30 2005

Steve/Tom/Russ,

Glad to read your positive responses. At this point we're not geared
towards package support so linking to something here doesn't really
work as it's likely to generate some queries I'm sure - even though
it'll work out of the box. :-).

It's been a while since I put the whole thing together but I'll spend
some time next week to write something up and put the whole lot in a
tar/jar and feel free to use as you will. The nice thing about
distributing it from your ldm source tree would be the inclusion of the
shareable object builds, required for the JNI, as part of the original
build scheme - there is a slight twist to that.  But, once  you have
the JNI interface built the Java is trivial, even the signal handling
issues come out in the wash.

On the other hand, if you'd rather, we could wait until FSL is in the 
position to support this. It is my intention to distribute software
developed here that is more fully supported with maintained metadata
(e.g. full GRIB/BUFR table bitemporal databases). This obviously means
that we would change the current attitude towards support and so could
better deal with question/bugs raised by doing this.

Paul.