Spawn reload and reset actions to all pods

[dnlkoch]

This suggests to emit the newly introduced LifecycleEvent events on reset (ResetEvent) and reload (ReloadEvent) respectively. Connected services will receive this events to actually reload and/or reset their catalog and configuration.

See #518.

[buehner]

@vuilleumierc @danduk82 We rebased against the main branch and it seems that the acceptance tests fail for some reason. But to me it looks this is not related to the changes in our branch, right?

[vuilleumierc]

@vuilleumierc @danduk82 We rebased against the main branch and it seems that the acceptance tests fail for some reason. But to me it looks this is not related to the changes in our branch, right?

Hi @buehner, I think you're right, it's not linked to your change. We will look at this Friday or next week, in the meantime feel free to ignore these two tests.

It seems the GetTile URL is wrong (http://gateway:8080/geoserver/cloud/geoserver/cloud/gwc/service/wmts), any chance this could be linked to your changes @pmauduit ? It could be that the GetCapabilities is adding 2 times /geoserver/cloud in the capabilities document

[groldan]

Hey this is looking good. I'm asking for a couple changes in the comments.
Additionally, please make sure to:

• squash all the commits into a single one, with a meaningful title and an abstract explaining the changes.
• check out for new issues introduced by the pull request as reported by SonarLint. You'll have to wait for the "SonarCloud QA" build job to finish.
  It currently reports 6 new issues:
  

[groldan]

oh, btw, @buehner @dnlkoch, given this contribution is more than a couple lines, we need to make sure you've signed the GeoServer contribution agreement, either individually or covered by your company's CLA. Please check https://docs.geoserver.org/main/en/developer/policies/committing.html and the CONTRIBUTING.md file for instructions if not yet covered by a CLA.

[vuilleumierc]

Regarding the failing tests, they now pass on main (thanks @groldan) so if you rebase you should be all set

[buehner]

Thanks for the feedback. We will continue on this soon

[marcjansen]

oh, btw, @buehner @dnlkoch, given this contribution is more than a couple lines, we need to make sure you've signed the GeoServer contribution agreement, either individually or covered by your company's CLA. Please check https://docs.geoserver.org/main/en/developer/policies/committing.html and the CONTRIBUTING.md file for instructions if not yet covered by a CLA.

CCLA sent just now to OSGeo, relevant people of the PR were in CC

[groldan]

Thanks @marcjansen , that's great.
@buehner @dnlkoch , I'm trying to wrap up 1.9.0 asap. Do you guys think you'd have time to work on the pr feedback this week?
Cheers

[buehner]

i think this week it will be rather difficult to find time to work on this, but on monday we should definitely have time for it

[groldan]

@dnlkoch @buehner thanks a lot for addressing all the code reviews.
In my opinion, the only thing missing is to squash all 22 commits into a single one and provide a good title and description.
Sorry I'm picky about it, but having a bunch of commits with small comments for what's rather a single functionality is detrimental for the final log. Don't get me wrong, I do it all the time, and worse, I commit with just "tmp" or "WIP" comments, but once it's done I'd rather have a single or a couple of commits with sensible descriptions.

Other than that, congrats on the great work

[dnlkoch]

@groldan You're absolutely right! Having all of those interim commits contained in the history is surely not needed. Fixed it right now and thanks again for your valuable review!