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 <vola...@gmail.com> 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 > Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer >
_______________________________________________ Qgis-developer mailing list Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer