[Pywps-dev] [Incubator] [motion] PyWPS to enter incubation (fwd)

[Jachym Cepicky]

As Luis is writing and Tom concluding: PyWPS currently  == PyWPS 3

The repositories are keeped seperated, to point out, "this is something
completely new, new philosophy, code base, license". Once is baked (at
least support for WPS 1:0.0), I would like to move it to geopython project

J

pá 17. 4. 2015 v 14:16 odesílatel Tom Kralidis <tomkralidis at gmail.com>
napsal:

> Sounds like PyWPS = PyWPS 3, then.
>
> I think Jachym as the main contact can update incom.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Apr 16, 2015, at 09:26, Luís de Sousa <luis.a.de.sousa at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> Hi Tom,
>
> The goal is for PyWPS 4 to support WPS 2.0, support for 1.0 is nearly
> covered, appart from assynchronous execution.
>
> As PyWPS 4 is still in development and not user ready, I would prefer to
> keep it in its own repo for now. Once we deem it ready for public release
> then we can think of merging the repos.
>
> How can the InCom be contacted? Or is it something Jachym can do?
>
> Luis
> On 16 Apr 2015 15:13, "Tom Kralidis" <tomkralidis at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> Thanks Luis.  Can someone clarify this to InCom, then?
>>
>> I'm wondering whether PyWPS 3 / 4 should be in the same repository, with
>> 3 being master and 4 being a branch? This way the project is logically
>> consistent ('PyWPS').
>>
>> Will PyWPS 4 support WPS 1.0.0?
>>
>> On Thu, 9 Apr 2015, Luís de Sousa wrote:
>>
>>  Date: Thu, 9 Apr 2015 22:02:33 +0200
>>> From: Luís de Sousa <luis.a.de.sousa at gmail.com>
>>> To: Tom Kralidis <tomkralidis at gmail.com>
>>> Cc: "pywps-dev at lists.osgeo.org" <pywps-dev at lists.osgeo.org>
>>> Subject: Re: [Pywps-dev] [Incubator] [motion] PyWPS to enter incubation
>>> (fwd)
>>>
>>> Hi Tom,
>>>
>>> These two versions are part of a same project.  Version 4 is a major
>>> step forward from version 3, but the underlying concept is the same.
>>>
>>> More than a re-write, PyWPS-4 is intended to deliver WPS 2.0 compliance.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>> Luís
>>>
>>> On 9 April 2015 at 13:54, Tom Kralidis <tomkralidis at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Hi all: FYI per below for clarification as we move forward with OSGeo
>>>> incubation.
>>>>
>>>> Can someone response to Dimitris' question?
>>>>
>>>> ..Tom
>>>>
>>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>>> Date: Wed, 8 Apr 2015 03:58:09 +0200 (CEST)
>>>> From: Dimitris Kotzinos <kotzino at gmail.com>
>>>> To: incubator at lists.osgeo.org
>>>> Subject: Re: [Incubator] [motion] PyWPS to enter incubation
>>>>
>>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> no objection in general and the project is within OSGEO scope and has
>>>> been
>>>> around for quite a long time. But I would like to ask for a
>>>> clarification
>>>> before voting: what is the relation between PyWPS-3 and PyWPS-4 and
>>>> since
>>>> the second is written from scratch do we accept both for incubation?
>>>> And if
>>>> so as one project?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks in advance for clarifying this,
>>>> Best regards,
>>>>
>>>> Dimitris
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Incubator mailing list
>>>> Incubator at lists.osgeo.org
>>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/incubator
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> pywps-dev mailing list
>>>> pywps-dev at lists.osgeo.org
>>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pywps-dev
>>>>
>>>
>>>  _______________________________________________
> pywps-dev mailing list
> pywps-dev at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pywps-dev
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/pywps-dev/attachments/20150423/0209882d/attachment.html>