[pygeoapi] PSC vote: RFC7: Data validation for transactions

[Tom Kralidis]

Hi all: vote passed with +1 from justb4, kalxas, jorgejesus,
francbartoli, tomkralidis.

Thanks

..Tom

On Tue, Aug 11, 2026 at 7:02 AM Tom Kralidis <tomkralidis at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi all: updated sequence with update to RFC6:
>
> - amend RFC6 to be only for plugin context (noting that we reset the voting)
> - approve/merge RFC7 and its associated PR
> - open a PR to only remove pydantic (does not need an RFC)
> - update RFC6 PR accordingly
>
> Thanks
>
> ..Tom
>
> On Mon, Aug 10, 2026 at 10:45 AM Tom Kralidis <tomkralidis at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Francesco: thanks for the info.  I would have preferred that RFC6
> > focused only on the plugin context discussion.  I would suggest the
> > following then in sequence:
> >
> > - declare RFC6 closed/not planned
> > - approve/merge RFC7 and its associated PR
> > - open a PR to only remove pydantic (does not need an RFC)
> > - open RFC8 and associated PR to propose a plugin context
> >
> > Does this make sense? I think this is the most sensible path forward
> > to ensure stability.
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > ..Tom
> >
> > On Mon, Aug 10, 2026 at 10:27 AM Francesco Bartoli <xbartolone at gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi Tom,
> > >
> > > before moving forward with this can we clarify how you would like to coordinate with RFC 6 which had already got three +1 with no other comments and has somehow some overlaps with the data validation design?
> > >
> > > If I remember well what we discussed in one of our last meetings the plan was:
> > > 1. Keep RFC6’s description only for the introduction of a plugin context without any relation with pydantic’s removal and moving forward with the approval with the missing two votes
> > > 2. split PR https://github.com/geopython/pygeoapi/pull/2307 into two and move the plugin context implementation to a new PR that would close RFC 6
> > >
> > > Regarding the RFC7 implementation I will leave some comments directly in the PR.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Francesco
> > > On 10 Aug 2026 at 14:53 +0200, Jorge S. Mendes de Jesus via pygeoapi <pygeoapi at lists.osgeo.org>, wrote:
> > >
> > > +1
> > >
> > > On 8/10/26 12:20 PM, Just van den Broecke via pygeoapi wrote:
> > >
> > > +1
> > >
> > > On 07/08/2026 13:20, Tom Kralidis via pygeoapi wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi all: FYI per subject, putting RFC7 [1] to PSC vote.
> > > >
> > > > I will start with my +1.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks
> > > >
> > > > ..Tom
> > > >
> > > > [1] https://pygeoapi.io/development/rfc/7
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > pygeoapi mailing list
> > > > pygeoapi at lists.osgeo.org
> > > > https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/pygeoapi
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > pygeoapi mailing list
> > > pygeoapi at lists.osgeo.org
> > > https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/pygeoapi
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > pygeoapi mailing list
> > > pygeoapi at lists.osgeo.org
> > > https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/pygeoapi