update geotools 20 to 34

[ChenyuWang98]

What's changed?

What's your motivation?

Anything in particular you'd like reviewers to focus on?

Anyone you would like to review specifically?

Have you considered any alternatives or workarounds?

Any additional context

Checklist

• I've added unit tests to cover both positive and negative cases
• I've read and applied the recipe conventions and best practices
• I've used the IntelliJ IDEA auto-formatter on affected files

[timtebeek]

I wonder if all of these can be replaced with

  - org.openrewrite.java.ChangePackage:
      oldPackageName: org.geotools.data
      newPackageName: org.geotools.data.api
      recursive: false

[ChenyuWang98]

The reason why I list it this way is that what is not listed does not need to be modified.

[timtebeek]

Judging by the others I'm seeing, isn't this the wrong way round?

Suggested change

	- org.openrewrite.java.ChangeType:
	oldFullyQualifiedTypeName: org.geotools.api.data.Join
	newFullyQualifiedTypeName: org.geotools.data.Join
	- org.openrewrite.java.ChangeType:
	oldFullyQualifiedTypeName: org.geotools.data.Join
	newFullyQualifiedTypeName: org.geotools.api.data.Join

[ChenyuWang98]

This might be the class I previously identified that didn't need modification; we can remove it for now.

[timtebeek]

Thanks for sharing your recipe here @ChenyuWang98 . I do wonder if perhaps this would be better aimed as a contribution to https://github.com/geotools/geotools.

Quite a few projects similarly maintain their own recipes, as seen on:
https://docs.openrewrite.org/reference/community-recipes#projects

In this case I don't think GeoTools would fit in with the other recipes in rewrite-migrate-java, and perhaps doesn't quite meet the bar for us to spin up and maintain a separate repository for it.

Let us know what kind of feedback you get from GeoTools themselves, and we can reevaluate from there.

[ChenyuWang98]

Okay, I'll ask the geotools project.