Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Module for resource management / dynamic resources #1351

Open
matthesrieke opened this issue Sep 18, 2023 · 5 comments
Open

Module for resource management / dynamic resources #1351

matthesrieke opened this issue Sep 18, 2023 · 5 comments
Labels
enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@matthesrieke
Copy link

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
Currently, pygeoapi does not allow to add new resources to the running instance. Resource are defined via config and a restart is required to enable new resources. This feature request is a first step into the goal to allow dynamic additional/removal/update (basically CRUD) of resources at runtime.

Describe the solution you'd like
The idea of this feature request is to refactor the API class to use a dedicated class for resource management. Currently, API uses a lot of self.config['resources'] style access. By introducing a dedicated ResourceRegistry (abstract class), the architecture will allow to replace the config-based implementation with a CRUD style registry, even controlled by an API to allow a transactions.

The implementing class for ResourceRegistry can be controlled via the configuration.

Describe alternatives you've considered
Alternatives are to implement some workarounds in the API class, but they would make the class even more complex.

Additional context
I have seen some related requests in the GitHub discussions here:

A WIP branch is already in progress: master...52North:pygeoapi:feature/resource-registry

@matthesrieke matthesrieke added the enhancement New feature or request label Sep 18, 2023
Copy link

As per RFC4, this Issue has been inactive for 90 days. In order to manage maintenance burden, it will be automatically closed in 7 days.

@github-actions github-actions bot added stale Issue marked stale by stale-bot and removed stale Issue marked stale by stale-bot labels Mar 10, 2024
@ridoo
Copy link

ridoo commented Apr 30, 2024

@matthesrieke may be related: #1636

@matthesrieke
Copy link
Author

Thanks, will join the conversation.

Copy link

github-actions bot commented Aug 4, 2024

This Issue has been inactive for 90 days. As per RFC4, in order to manage maintenance burden, it will be automatically closed in 7 days.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the stale Issue marked stale by stale-bot label Aug 4, 2024
@ridoo
Copy link

ridoo commented Aug 6, 2024

Is there any statement from the maintainers (@tomkralidis @justb4 ) on this? I saw #1636 was scheduled for MS 0.17 & 0.18, but as far I can see there are open discussion threads.

@github-actions github-actions bot removed the stale Issue marked stale by stale-bot label Aug 11, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants