Interested in PRs?

[kylebarron]

1. I think it's important to have efficient and easy to use interop between geoarrow and shapely, and I think this is the best point to start from. Are you interested in any PRs to this package? I.e. are you still interested in maintaining it?

2. I was talking with @paleolimbot a little while ago and we discussed a namespacing approach to geoarrow in Python. So I could distribute my rust bindings with geoarrow.rust and Dewey could distribute his with e.g. geoarrow.c and they'd be able to interoperate with each other. The main important note here is that there can't be a geoarrow Python package with an __init__.py in geoarrow/__init__.py because then the namespaced modules will never be found (ref native namespacing docs). So if you do plan to publish this to PyPI, would you be interested in changing the name to be something like geoarrow.python or geoarrow.shapely (or something else)?

   In consultation with you and Dewey it might also be a good idea to take the geoarrow top level python package name so no one ends up publishing a geoarrow package that just installs the other namespace packages.

[kylebarron]

Also I've been thinking about moving https://github.com/kylebarron/geoarrow-rs to the geoarrow org; would you be interested in moving this or a similar pure-python geoarrow implementation to the geoarrow org? It might be nice to have all the implementations under the same org

Edit: I'd forgotten I'd even created a geoarrow-python repo in the geoarrow org 😂 https://github.com/geoarrow/geoarrow-python

[paleolimbot]

Yeah and I can move geoarrow-pandas and geoarrow-pyarrow to geoarrow/geoarrow-python so all the non-native interfaces are all in one place!

[kylebarron]

I made geoarrow/geoarrow-python#2 and we can probably discuss there 🙏