[Qgis-psc] Requesting support for WFS compliance from OSGeo

[Nyall Dawson]

On Wed, 16 Jan 2019 at 06:06, Andreas Neumann <a.neumann at carto.net> wrote:
>
> Hi Anita,
>
> Thanks for investigating. I have three ideas how to spend OSGeo funds:
>
> 1. How about a funding for the MacOS builds? Filling the gap from the crowd funding initiative? See https://www.lutraconsulting.co.uk/crowdfunding/macos-qgis/ - the campaign runs until end of January - but if the target is not met, it would be nice if OSGeo could cover the rest.
>
> 2. Another idea is investing into potential performance improvements in QGIS server. Profiling where most of the time is spent and where there is potential for improvement.
>
> 3. Helping to fund a potential github to gitlab migration (if this is feasible and wanted by the core devs) or Redmine to Github/Gitlab issues (if it is wanted by the core devs).
>

Another potential idea that Alessandro and I have been discussing
would be a project to "make PyQGIS more friendly". This would aim to
replace as many of the places in PyQGIS where an invalid call results
in a crash, and instead replacing them with friendly Python
exceptions. We'd also like to make the PyQGIS API more "pythonic", by
implementing expected Python conventions (like calling
some_container[-1] to get the final item in the container object, add
more iterators for QGIS classes, find places where subclassing results
in a lot of "boilerplate" code which could instead be replaced by
decorator syntaxes, ... ). We'd also like to investigate (and
implement) ways to bridge PyQGIS API to other widely-used Python data
science libraries, making it easier to e.g. use numpy alongside PyQGIS
(or scikit, or rasterio, .... etc).

Does this sound like a good candidate?

Nyall


> What do you think?
>
> Thanks and greetings,
>
> Andreas
>
> Am 15.01.19 um 20:03 schrieb Anita Graser:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 9:13 AM Paolo Cavallini <cavallini at faunalia.it> wrote:
>>
>> On 10/01/19 21:50, Anita Graser wrote:
>> > On Thu, Jan 10, 2019 at 9:43 PM Andreas Neumann <a.neumann at carto.net
>> > <mailto:a.neumann at carto.net>> wrote:
>> >> Ok - so Luigi asked for 4000 € and in addition 3000 € for WFS compliance.
>> >> Not sure if this is reasonable. I have no idea about the OSGeo budget.
>> >> Anita: do you think it is reasonable to ask for 7k? On the other hand
>> > we did not ask last year ...
>> >
>> > I'm not sure about the different budget items in the OSGeo budget. There
>> > is a separate section for events and another one for projects.
>> > Still, I guess they'll let us know if it's too much to ask for both.
>>
>> thanks for dealing with this. In case of conflicts, I'd give priority to
>> WFS.
>
>
> I've checked back with OSGeo and they told me that they are happy if projects/committees ask for bigger shares of the budget and put the money to good use. Seems like last year, a lot of the allocated budget was not used.
>
> For context of what we could be looking at, Jody mentioned that GeoServer may be requesting $15k for cite automation as part of their builds.
>
> So if there are any more ideas, I think we could still request support for other tasks as well.
>
> Regards,
> Anita
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Qgis-psc mailing list
> Qgis-psc at lists.osgeo.org
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc
>
> _______________________________________________
> Qgis-psc mailing list
> Qgis-psc at lists.osgeo.org
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc