WPS 2.0

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
6 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

WPS 2.0

Jorge Samuel Mendes de Jesus-2
Hi to all


What is the current status of WPS2.0 implementation has someone already implemented ??? 52N, degree???


I saw the WPS2.0 issue in github, and I am looking at a possibility for an inkind contribution for the development of WPS2.0  ( no money :( ) in pyWPS. How  much work/days would be necessary to implement WPS2.0  and release pywps4.2 ?


Jorge

_______________________________________________
pywps-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/pywps-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: WPS 2.0

Jachym Cepicky
Hi Jorge,

the question is IMHO premature, there is no roadmap and we (I) can not
make any eastimation IMHO.

I'm still (slowly) getting through the standard.

One of new key features would be nested inputs, which would be *good to
have* - and having support for them back in 1.0.0 response (some
unpacked version of nested inputs for 2.0.0)

So, what you can basically do, read the standard and prepare the roadmap
(will help there)

J



Dne 20.2.2017 v 10:59 Mendes de Jesus, Jorge napsal(a):

> Hi to all
>
>
> What is the current status of WPS2.0 implementation has someone already implemented ??? 52N, degree???
>
>
> I saw the WPS2.0 issue in github, and I am looking at a possibility for an inkind contribution for the development of WPS2.0  ( no money :( ) in pyWPS. How  much work/days would be necessary to implement WPS2.0  and release pywps4.2 ?
>
>
> Jorge
>
> _______________________________________________
> pywps-dev mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/pywps-dev
>

--
Jachym Cepicky
e-mail: [hidden email]
twitter: @jachymc
_______________________________________________
pywps-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/pywps-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: WPS 2.0

Tom Kralidis
+1 agree. An analysis of standard, changes between WPS 1.0 and 2.0,
and impacts on the codebase will help milestone whether it's targeted
for PyWPS 4.2.0 or 5 (breaking changes).

On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 5:01 PM, Jáchym Čepický
<[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi Jorge,
>
> the question is IMHO premature, there is no roadmap and we (I) can not make
> any eastimation IMHO.
>
> I'm still (slowly) getting through the standard.
>
> One of new key features would be nested inputs, which would be *good to
> have* - and having support for them back in 1.0.0 response (some unpacked
> version of nested inputs for 2.0.0)
>
> So, what you can basically do, read the standard and prepare the roadmap
> (will help there)
>
> J
>
>
>
> Dne 20.2.2017 v 10:59 Mendes de Jesus, Jorge napsal(a):
>>
>> Hi to all
>>
>>
>> What is the current status of WPS2.0 implementation has someone already
>> implemented ??? 52N, degree???
>>
>>
>> I saw the WPS2.0 issue in github, and I am looking at a possibility for an
>> inkind contribution for the development of WPS2.0  ( no money :( ) in pyWPS.
>> How  much work/days would be necessary to implement WPS2.0  and release
>> pywps4.2 ?
>>
>>
>> Jorge
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> pywps-dev mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/pywps-dev
>>
>
> --
> Jachym Cepicky
> e-mail: [hidden email]
> twitter: @jachymc
> _______________________________________________
> pywps-dev mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/pywps-dev
_______________________________________________
pywps-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/pywps-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: WPS 2.0

Jorge Samuel Mendes de Jesus-2
Hi to all

+1 agree, with analysis between WPS1.0.0 and 2.0, roadmap

I will look at the topic, shall I use the issue #74 (https://github.com/geopython/pywps/issues/74)

Or make a Wiki entrance ?

Jorge


________________________________________
From: [hidden email] <[hidden email]> on behalf of Tom Kralidis <[hidden email]>
Sent: 21 February 2017 01:45
To: Jáchym Čepický
Cc: Mendes de Jesus, Jorge; [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [Pywps-dev] WPS 2.0

+1 agree. An analysis of standard, changes between WPS 1.0 and 2.0,
and impacts on the codebase will help milestone whether it's targeted
for PyWPS 4.2.0 or 5 (breaking changes).

On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 5:01 PM, Jáchym Čepický
<[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi Jorge,
>
> the question is IMHO premature, there is no roadmap and we (I) can not make
> any eastimation IMHO.
>
> I'm still (slowly) getting through the standard.
>
> One of new key features would be nested inputs, which would be *good to
> have* - and having support for them back in 1.0.0 response (some unpacked
> version of nested inputs for 2.0.0)
>
> So, what you can basically do, read the standard and prepare the roadmap
> (will help there)
>
> J
>
>
>
> Dne 20.2.2017 v 10:59 Mendes de Jesus, Jorge napsal(a):
>>
>> Hi to all
>>
>>
>> What is the current status of WPS2.0 implementation has someone already
>> implemented ??? 52N, degree???
>>
>>
>> I saw the WPS2.0 issue in github, and I am looking at a possibility for an
>> inkind contribution for the development of WPS2.0  ( no money :( ) in pyWPS.
>> How  much work/days would be necessary to implement WPS2.0  and release
>> pywps4.2 ?
>>
>>
>> Jorge
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> pywps-dev mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/pywps-dev
>>
>
> --
> Jachym Cepicky
> e-mail: [hidden email]
> twitter: @jachymc
> _______________________________________________
> pywps-dev mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/pywps-dev
_______________________________________________
pywps-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/pywps-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: WPS 2.0

Jachym Cepicky
Imho wiki will be more flexible - it should point us to several tasks
(our milestones in our roadmap)

J

Dne 21.2.2017 v 07:47 Mendes de Jesus, Jorge napsal(a):

> Hi to all
>
> +1 agree, with analysis between WPS1.0.0 and 2.0, roadmap
>
> I will look at the topic, shall I use the issue #74 (https://github.com/geopython/pywps/issues/74)
>
> Or make a Wiki entrance ?
>
> Jorge
>
>
> ________________________________________
> From: [hidden email] <[hidden email]> on behalf of Tom Kralidis <[hidden email]>
> Sent: 21 February 2017 01:45
> To: Jáchym Čepický
> Cc: Mendes de Jesus, Jorge; [hidden email]
> Subject: Re: [Pywps-dev] WPS 2.0
>
> +1 agree. An analysis of standard, changes between WPS 1.0 and 2.0,
> and impacts on the codebase will help milestone whether it's targeted
> for PyWPS 4.2.0 or 5 (breaking changes).
>
> On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 5:01 PM, Jáchym Čepický
> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> Hi Jorge,
>>
>> the question is IMHO premature, there is no roadmap and we (I) can not make
>> any eastimation IMHO.
>>
>> I'm still (slowly) getting through the standard.
>>
>> One of new key features would be nested inputs, which would be *good to
>> have* - and having support for them back in 1.0.0 response (some unpacked
>> version of nested inputs for 2.0.0)
>>
>> So, what you can basically do, read the standard and prepare the roadmap
>> (will help there)
>>
>> J
>>
>>
>>
>> Dne 20.2.2017 v 10:59 Mendes de Jesus, Jorge napsal(a):
>>>
>>> Hi to all
>>>
>>>
>>> What is the current status of WPS2.0 implementation has someone already
>>> implemented ??? 52N, degree???
>>>
>>>
>>> I saw the WPS2.0 issue in github, and I am looking at a possibility for an
>>> inkind contribution for the development of WPS2.0  ( no money :( ) in pyWPS.
>>> How  much work/days would be necessary to implement WPS2.0  and release
>>> pywps4.2 ?
>>>
>>>
>>> Jorge
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> pywps-dev mailing list
>>> [hidden email]
>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/pywps-dev
>>>
>>
>> --
>> Jachym Cepicky
>> e-mail: [hidden email]
>> twitter: @jachymc
>> _______________________________________________
>> pywps-dev mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/pywps-dev

--
Jachym Cepicky
e-mail: [hidden email]
twitter: @jachymc
_______________________________________________
pywps-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/pywps-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: WPS 2.0

Luí­s Moreira de Sousa
Hi everyone,

Me and Calin did some research on WPS 2.0. The multiprocess library does not support directly any of the new requests: PAUSE, RESUME and CANCEL. On Linux, it might not be too hard to implement CANCEL by storing the process id and then calling the OS. As for PAUSE and RESUME we could not find any obvious implementation. Perhaps multiprocess has evolved since then.

Celery can eventually help with this. However, it probably clashes with the goal of "containerising" running processes.

Regards.

--
Luís Moreira de Sousa
Im Grund 6
CH-8600 Dübendorf
Switzerland

Phone: +41 (0)79 812 62 65



_______________________________________________
pywps-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/pywps-dev