[Geoserver-devel] Possible to financially sponsor extension-support for Python/WPS plugin?

GeoServer GeoServer Developer
1

All -

My little outfit has been a user of the WPS/Python-scripting plugin for a long time, but we're currently maintaining some modified/recompiled library-files alongside a (hackish) fork of Geoserver (described in https://sourceforge.net/p/geoserver/mailman/message/35410958/) to allow compatibility with the POST method to allow for large requests and to provide improved security. Although I pull Geoserver updates across from the official repo from time to time, this is messy, and I have not sunk the hours into figuring out how to return status-codes other than 200 OK or 500 Internal Server Error, as it seems that anything /other/ than a 200 coming out of Flask is rewritten to a 500 by the Java code it runs inside of.
Basically, what I have works okay but there are a lot of potential maintenance-gotchas.

Since first setting up the scripting plugin and joining Geoserver listservs a few years back, I've seen semi-frequent questions appear about the Python/WPS plugin and whether there's a maintainer to answer questions, etc. When I checked last, there was no designated maintainer, the web-UI component (which I didn't even know about until someone mentioned there used to be one that worked) was broken, and contrib/community-files and docs were out of date.

Would it be within GSIP-scope to propose some related fixes and pay to make support available for the plugin?

- Patrick O'Toole

Full-Stack Developer
Wyoming Natural Diversity Database
UW Berry Biodiversity Conservation Center
Department 3381, 1000 E. University Av.
Laramie, WY 82071
P: 307-766-3018

2

That would be an appropriate use of a GSIP:

Thoughts:

  • We do recommend writing a proposal to verify an approach prior to starting work, in the past when the idea was associated with pending funding this was made note of (so folks do not get their hopes up).
  • This a subtle trap where if a GSIP for a good idea is proposed there can be a temptation to hang back and let someone else pay for it
  • In geotools we use proposals to explore an idea and also secure a commitment for each task (to ensure a contributor is in position to do the work, you could do something similar with funding targets).

One thing we experimented with last year was accepting some sponsorship for a feature (improved SLD interoperability between QGIS and GeoServer) and then requesting proposals. You may wish to look at how this is turning out and consider if the approach would work in your case?

···

–
Jody Garnett

3

That would be an appropriate use of a GSIP:

Thoughts:

  • We do recommend writing a proposal to verify an approach prior to starting work, in the past when the idea was associated with pending funding this was made note of (so folks do not get their hopes up).
  • This a subtle trap where if a GSIP for a good idea is proposed there can be a temptation to hang back and let someone else pay for it
  • In geotools we use proposals to explore an idea and also secure a commitment for each task (to ensure a contributor is in position to do the work, you could do something similar with funding targets).

Jody, I would discourage usage of proposals this way, people have already tried to do that in the hopes of getting an idea “accepted” and then
pretending to see it implemented only because of that, without funds. Proposals were created exactly to verify that the activity had enough resources behind to make it happen.

Here we are starting the opposite, someone is willing to sponsor, and the module is a community one, thus unsupported, a part of the codebase
where no proposals are needed.

One thing we experimented with last year was accepting some sponsorship for a feature (improved SLD interoperability between QGIS and GeoServer) and then requesting proposals. You may wish to look at how this is turning out and consider if the approach would work in your case?

Yep, that would work… but in that case we started with a given amount of money (which was not enough to do the full job) and then the GeoServer PSC and others pitched in to reach
a threshold that made it doable.
I believe the blockers in this case are two:

  • Need to find someone familiar enough with the module to do the job
  • Need to figure out how much money would be needed (or someone starts with a blind donation to get things started like in the QGIS raster symbolizer export case)
    Cheers

Andrea

···

GeoServer Professional Services from the experts! Visit http://goo.gl/it488V for more information. == Ing. Andrea Aime @geowolf Technical Lead GeoSolutions S.A.S. Via di Montramito 3/A 55054 Massarosa (LU) phone: +39 0584 962313 fax: +39 0584 1660272 mob: +39 339 8844549 http://www.geo-solutions.it http://twitter.com/geosolutions_it ------------------------------------------------------- Con riferimento alla normativa sul trattamento dei dati personali (Reg. UE 2016/679 - Regolamento generale sulla protezione dei dati “GDPR”), si precisa che ogni circostanza inerente alla presente email (il suo contenuto, gli eventuali allegati, etc.) è un dato la cui conoscenza è riservata al/i solo/i destinatario/i indicati dallo scrivente. Se il messaggio Le è giunto per errore, è tenuta/o a cancellarlo, ogni altra operazione è illecita. Le sarei comunque grato se potesse darmene notizia. This email is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure. We remind that - as provided by European Regulation 2016/679 “GDPR” - copying, dissemination or use of this e-mail or the information herein by anyone other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify us immediately by telephone or e-mail.

4

Thanks for the info.

One thing we experimented with last year was accepting some sponsorship for a feature (improved SLD interoperability between QGIS and GeoServer) and then requesting proposals. You may wish to look at how this is turning out and consider if the approach would work in your case?

someone is willing to sponsor, and the module is a community one, thus unsupported, a part of the codebase where no proposals are needed.

So it sounds like this would be split up into two parts; the first would be a proposal for some core-changes allowing POST-requests to be accepted by the scripting plugin and allowing it to return the full spectrum of HTTP-style status-codes (depending on where in the code any interference with this might be occurring). I’d write a GSIP at the outset to clarify requirements and provide a basis for discussion/negotiation on specifics, and I’d also specify how much funding is available. The other part would be to commission work for community-module-updates, which would be less formal, since these don’t need central approval. (Discussions about that work don’t necessarily need to take place on-list, correct?)

I believe the blockers in this case are two:

  • Need to find someone familiar enough with the module to do the job
  • Need to figure out how much money would be needed (or someone starts with a blind donation to get things started like in the QGIS raster symbolizer export case)

I’ve already got one (strong!) candidate who can handle the community-module aspect of the work, so we’re in good standing on your first point. To address the second bullet, I will write the aforementioned proposal once the dollar-amount we can commit to supporting changes becomes clear. I can (shall) expressly state what this amount is in the footnotes of the GSIP itself to avoid any funny business. So again, I’ll only release a proposal once funds are in-hand, so I’m not soaking up time before I know what can be promised on our end.

Does it sound like I have that straight?

Thanks again,

···
  • Patrick
5

Hey folks, chiming in here as I am the original author of the module in question. I do freelance GeoServer consulting work so I’d be happy to engage with you Patrick to get this work done. As Andrea mentioned the code in question here is in a community module which normally doesn’t require a formal proposal to do work in, at least not at this time.

If you’re game Patrick I suggest we work out the details offline and then update the developer list with a plan of sorts, elicit feedback, etc…

That said if the PMC and core developers have an interest in tackling this work as a collective group (similar to other initiatives in the past) I would happily step aside and allow things to go that route.

On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 10:00 AM Andrea Aime <andrea.aime@anonymised.com> wrote:

On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 5:50 PM Jody Garnett <jody.garnett@anonymised.com> wrote:

That would be an appropriate use of a GSIP:

Thoughts:

  • We do recommend writing a proposal to verify an approach prior to starting work, in the past when the idea was associated with pending funding this was made note of (so folks do not get their hopes up).
  • This a subtle trap where if a GSIP for a good idea is proposed there can be a temptation to hang back and let someone else pay for it
  • In geotools we use proposals to explore an idea and also secure a commitment for each task (to ensure a contributor is in position to do the work, you could do something similar with funding targets).

Jody, I would discourage usage of proposals this way, people have already tried to do that in the hopes of getting an idea “accepted” and then
pretending to see it implemented only because of that, without funds. Proposals were created exactly to verify that the activity had enough resources behind to make it happen.

Here we are starting the opposite, someone is willing to sponsor, and the module is a community one, thus unsupported, a part of the codebase
where no proposals are needed.

One thing we experimented with last year was accepting some sponsorship for a feature (improved SLD interoperability between QGIS and GeoServer) and then requesting proposals. You may wish to look at how this is turning out and consider if the approach would work in your case?

Yep, that would work… but in that case we started with a given amount of money (which was not enough to do the full job) and then the GeoServer PSC and others pitched in to reach
a threshold that made it doable.
I believe the blockers in this case are two:

  • Need to find someone familiar enough with the module to do the job
  • Need to figure out how much money would be needed (or someone starts with a blind donation to get things started like in the QGIS raster symbolizer export case)
    Cheers

Andrea

==

GeoServer Professional Services from the experts! Visit http://goo.gl/it488V for more information. == Ing. Andrea Aime @geowolf Technical Lead GeoSolutions S.A.S. Via di Montramito 3/A 55054 Massarosa (LU) phone: +39 0584 962313 fax: +39 0584 1660272 mob: +39 339 8844549 http://www.geo-solutions.it http://twitter.com/geosolutions_it ------------------------------------------------------- Con riferimento alla normativa sul trattamento dei dati personali (Reg. UE 2016/679 - Regolamento generale sulla protezione dei dati “GDPR”), si precisa che ogni circostanza inerente alla presente email (il suo contenuto, gli eventuali allegati, etc.) è un dato la cui conoscenza è riservata al/i solo/i destinatario/i indicati dallo scrivente. Se il messaggio Le è giunto per errore, è tenuta/o a cancellarlo, ogni altra operazione è illecita. Le sarei comunque grato se potesse darmene notizia. This email is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure. We remind that - as provided by European Regulation 2016/679 “GDPR” - copying, dissemination or use of this e-mail or the information herein by anyone other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify us immediately by telephone or e-mail.

Geoserver-devel mailing list
Geoserver-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel