[gdal-dev] Motion: RFC 78: gdal-utils package

[Idan Miara]

Thanks for everyone who participated!

I declare this motion passed with the following votes from PSC members:

+1 from EvenR, HowardB
+0 from KurtS, JukkaR
-0 from SeanG

Idan

On Fri, 26 Mar 2021, 18:57 , <Matt.Wilkie at yukon.ca> wrote:

> Thanks, that’s exactly the info I needed to get oriented.
>
>
>
> -Matt
>
>
>
> *From:* Idan Miara <idan at miara.com>
> *Sent:* March 26, 2021 5:29 AM
> *To:* Matt.Wilkie <Matt.Wilkie at yukon.ca>
> *Cc:* gdal dev <gdal-dev at lists.osgeo.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [gdal-dev] Motion: RFC 78: gdal-utils package
>
>
>
> Hi Matt,
>
>
>
> Point noted. I've updated the Summary section:
>
>
>
> Idan
> Summary
>
> This RFC suggests to put all the GDAL python modules (formly scripts),
> except from the GDAL core SWIG bindings, into their own distribution on
> pypi. The GDAL python sub-package osgeo.utils (introduced in GDAL 3.2)
> would be renamed into a package named osgeo_utils.
>
> The standalone python scripts from GDAL <= 3.1 were transformed to
> osgeo.utils in GDAL 3.2. For backwards compatibility these scripts still
> exist and function as tiny wrappers around the python modules. Users of
> these scripts would not be effected from this RFC as the scripts would
> continue to function in GDAL 3.3 in the same way as in GDAL <= 3.2.
>
> To allow maximum backwards compatibility, The osgeo package (which
> includes the GDAL core SWIG bindings) and the osgeo_utils package will
> continue to be distributed in a single sdist named gdal in pypi.
>
> In addition, a new pure python wheel distribution named gdal-utils will be
> available in pypi under the name gdal-utils.
>
> This will allow users who wish to upgrade the utils without upgrading the
> bindings to do so with pip install --upgrade gdal-utils (see more details
> in the following sections).
>
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, 26 Mar 2021 at 00:11, mhw-at-yg <matt.wilkie at yukon.ca> wrote:
>
> Having been away from gdal-dev for some years, happily existing as an end
> of
> the line tool only user, and only recently re-engaging with the development
> community I have nothing to say on the strength and validity the RFC.
>
> I would like to comment though that it doesn't have a high altitude
> overview
> and say what gdal-utils is and where to look at it now. For instance is it
> all the files in ./gdal/swig/python/scripts/? or gdal/swig/python/osgeo/?
> or
> even gdal/swig/python? or somewhere else I haven't looked yet. It needn't
> be
> a lot words (there's so much there already it's hard for a newcomer like me
> to make out the structural bones). One sentence and a link would probably
> do
> it.
>
> I am excited about the prospect of a gdal-utils sub project, whether it
> remains within the core repository or is carved off into it's own. It would
> be a named place where my skills have a chance of contributing little
> somethings, and I could easily ignore the much larger set of things I don't
> understand in GDAL proper. ;-)
>
> cheers,
>
>
>
> -----
> -Matt
> --
> Sent from: http://osgeo-org.1560.x6.nabble.com/GDAL-Dev-f3742093.html
> _______________________________________________
> gdal-dev mailing list
> gdal-dev at lists.osgeo.org
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/gdal-dev/attachments/20210326/9b75c402/attachment.html>