pywps-flask
pywps-flask copied to clipboard
Docker extension
Overview
Docker extension for pywps-flask. Updated readme. Added parameters to config file. Added requests for tests. Updated isolation Dockerfile.
Related Issue / Discussion
Additional Information
Contribution Agreement
(as per https://github.com/geopython/pywps/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.rst#contributions-and-licensing)
- [x] I'd like to contribute [feature X|bugfix Y|docs|something else] to PyWPS. I confirm that my contributions to PyWPS will be compatible with the PyWPS license guidelines at the time of contribution.
- [x] I have already previously agreed to the PyWPS Contributions and Licensing Guidelines
I have tested and tried to understand as maximum as I could, as far as could understand and IMHO. I have some comments concerning this PR
-
We should keep
pywps-flaskconnected only topywpsmaster or tag branch, and not to and not to an branch that has different code. (This could be a problem when working and testing on branch) -
There is a pull request on pywps https://github.com/geopython/pywps/pull/443 that first should be accepted and then specifically look at this PR and later look at
pywps-flask -
PR #443 on pywps will require a dock image to run the processes, think this will be better on the master of pywps
-
This pull request is properly done and has specific unnitests, I have set the configuration file to
mode=dockerbut got to many connection error: https://pastebin.com/sWZgKRGP it seems that the requests shoulf be async (for what I understood from other docs)
My recommendations:
- Wait until docker support is added to pywps
- After present a PR for the pywps-flask using 4.2 or 4.4
My IMHO:
- This is a very important work, and it has to be merged ASAP
- Code is well structured and with specific unnitests (good work)
@lazaa32 Care to comment in case I am missing something or not having a clear idea of what is going on @jachym I leave the final decision on how to proceed up to you.
* We should keep `pywps-flask` connected only to `pywps` master or tag branch, and not to and not to an branch that has different code. (This could be a problem when working and testing on branch) * There is a pull request on pywps [geopython/pywps#443](https://github.com/geopython/pywps/pull/443) that first should be accepted and then specifically look at this PR and later look at `pywps-flask`
I agree with you. I made both PRs to let you know that work both on pywps-flask and pywps is ready to test. Once geopython/pywps#443 is merged into master, there is no need for any other branch.
* PR #443 on pywps will require a dock image to run the processes, think this will be better on the master of pywps * This pull request is properly done and has specific unnitests, I have set the configuration file to `mode=docker` but got to many connection error: https://pastebin.com/sWZgKRGP it seems that the requests shoulf be async (for what I understood from other docs)
Could you check whether a container is at least created and started after submitting a request, please?
My recommendations:
* Wait until docker support is added to pywps * After present a PR for the pywps-flask using 4.2 or 4.4
+1
My IMHO:
* This is a very important work, and it has to be merged ASAP
It would be nice to get this merged by mid January. Right now I have a good wifi connection but later I can't promise I will have a chance to work on this constantly due to lack of electric power and wifi :(.
During my initial tests the docker containers where created. I will make a more extensive check to determine why they are not connecting