[ckan-dev] Future, flask, breaking things, funding.

Mon Sep 14 07:56:50 UTC 2015

On 09/14/2015 10:24 AM, Ross Jones wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I’ve recently been playing about with implementing parts of CKAN in Flask side-by-side with the current Pylons implementation. I’m doing it like this so that it isn’t immediately obvious that there’s a migration happening towards using Flask (aka nothing breaks).  I don’t think this branch should ever be merged, it’s more exploratory but it has raised some questions that I think it would be good to discuss.
>
> WARNING:anecdata
> It’s pretty clear that the vast majority of people asked would like to move to Flask as a replacement for some layers of the system (leaving things like logic and plugins alone).
> ENDWARNING
>
> We’ve discussed at the tech-team meetings, but I think a longer, more accessible conversation would be beneficial.
>
> 1. What version of CKAN should be targeted? Common sense suggests 3.0, but that being the case, exactly how far can we go in breaking some backward compatibility?  This isn’t really a technical question - would be good to hear what the community would accept …
>
> 2. Does it *really* need to be side-by-side?  Running Flask and Pylons side-by-side means staying on Python 2 for another few years (because Pylons).  A reasonably deep incision and removal of non-logic/non-plugin code would make a move to Py3 easier, but with some level of breakage in external plugins. Staying on 2 would mean a move to 3 at a later date and more pain.
>
> 3. Would the CKAN Association like to fund someone to do some of this work? This is just one of several ideas mentioned on https://github.com/ckan/ideas-and-roadmap/issues/152 that really needs to be done if CKAN is going to thrive instead of just survive.
>
> Any feedback welcome…
>
> Cheers
>
> Ross.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> ckan-dev mailing list
> ckan-dev at lists.okfn.org
> https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/ckan-dev
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/ckan-dev

Hi Ross,

I believe that a Flask port (or rewrite) is an excellent idea for CKAN 
3.0 in order to support Python 3.x
The alternative would be to port Pylons to Python 3.x, which perhaps is 
a more difficult task...

Given that Python 2.x will EOL relatively soon, CKAN should move forward.

Just my 2 cents.

Best,
Angelos

-- 
Angelos Tzotsos, PhD
OSGeo Charter Member
http://users.ntua.gr/tzotsos