-[[!template id=gitbranch branch=anarcat/master author="[[anarcat]]"]]
+[[!template id=gitbranch branch=anarcat/osm_arbitrary_layers author="[[anarcat]]"]]
I got tired of hacking at the osm.pm every time I wanted to change the layers, so I made it so the layers can be changed in the .setup file. In my master branch, there are now two new configuration settings: `osm_layers` and `osm_layers_order` which replace the hackish `osm_mapurl`. The variables are a hash and an array that allow the operator to define the list of URLs to be loaded as layers and also to change the order of layers. -- [[users/anarcat]]
>>> If there's no reason to order the other layers, that makes some sense.
>>> --[[Joey]]
+
+>>>> The layers are ordered because that's the way they are displayed in the menu. Take a look at the base layers on the top left here for an idea: <http://wiki.reseaulibre.ca/ikiwiki.cgi?map=map&do=osm&zoom=12&lat=45.5227&lon=-73.59554>. -- [[anarcat]]
+
+>>>> After sleeping over this - maybe it would be simpler if `osm_layers` was just an array. First, it would get rid of the duplication with `osm_layers_order`. Then I do not feel that having the keys in that hash is worth the duplication anymore. The only reason this is a hash is to provide an arbitrary string description for the layers. We could replace this with an automated description based on the path to the tiles provided.
+>>>>
+>>>> If that's an acceptable solution for you, I'll go right ahead and rewrite this in a separate branch for merging. Note that on my master branch, there are now 3 main changes that are not merged: arbitrary OSM layers (includes Google Maps support), KML formatting improvements (indentation, non-duplication of tags), minor OpenLayers improvements (don't sort layers arbitrarily, folders support, higher default zoom level and projection fixes). I can either make a branch for those three things or leave it on my master branch, but be warned that it will be hard to separate those as distinct/orthogonal patches as they mangle each other quite a bit.
+>>>>
+>>>> So basically, I need to know two things from you:
+>>>>
+>>>> 1. on the layers design: a) hash (which include arbitrary descriptions) + default value or b) a simple array with automated descriptions
+>>>> 2. the above changes on a single branch or on 3 different ones?
+>>>>
+>>>> Thanks for your time. -- [[anarcat]]
+
+>>>>> I have implemented 1.b) and 2. (ie. it's a simple array now, and I split this stuff in different branches.) I'll open another todo for the other branches. --[[anarcat]]
+
+>>>>>> [[merged|done]] --[[Joey]]
+
+Confirmed, thanks!! --[[anarcat]]