Hey Nathan I knew about your project...but forgot about it :-) Sorry for that.
What would you suggest doing? merging them maybe? I like that idea. In the end, the plan is just to have a sandbox to add those functions and eventually move them to core (btw, qgis.py sounds good to me...) I can make a PR to your repo if you think it is a good idea, and we keep on working there. Let me know also if you have ideas about what to add to fill those modules with useful stuff Cheers! 2015-11-02 14:29 GMT+01:00 Nathan Woodrow <[email protected]>: > Hey Victor, > > Working on the same kind of thing over here: > https://github.com/NathanW2/parfait > > IMO I would rather see a new module and not put it in qgis.utils. Something > like qgis.py or qgis.wrappers or something like that that. > > - Nathan > > On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 11:20 PM, Victor Olaya <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > >> > I'm in two minds as to whether it would be a good thing to have an >> > 'official' one. While I can see the use, surely if these things are >> > useful >> > then they should be included in the mainline API with proper API >> > guarantees? >> > I'm not sure I'd want to rely on a library that doesn't have an API >> > guarantee, and if you're making the guarantee then why not in core? If >> > they >> > are *required* for a plugin to be accepted, then they must be in core >> > and >> > have an API guarantee. >> > >> >> My ideas is definitely to put this into core (that's what I wrote in >> my email when i detailed the plans that i have for this), but I have >> started it as a separate repo to make it easier to collaborate and to >> start moving ASAP. >> >> I could write a QEP with this idea, get it approved, throw a bunch of >> empty py modules in qgis.utils and then start working, but I like to >> first do some work, get people into it, and then do the bureucracy to >> pass this to core (I am sure no one will say no to this once a nice >> collection of functions is ready) >> >> I will wait for other people to voice their opinion, and if most >> people agree on going taht other way, I have nothing against it >> _______________________________________________ >> Qgis-developer mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer > > _______________________________________________ Qgis-developer mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
