Seismic DDMS - INT (Software vendor) perspective
Michel - Expect consistency of implementation from various CSPs. There are some differences between different CSPs.
- Concerned about API versioning (changes) without notification to Software vendors. As software vendor, we have to adapt to these changes. With advance notification, we can plan for change suitably.
Paul Quinn - There are 3 issues raised.
- There will be styles and standards. Other part of the review - consistency across APIs.
- Versioning. This is also part of the review. Part of the versioning strategy of the Platform.
- Multiple implementations. Covered by common code initiative.
- C++ version - Ensure that it is properly tested and is performant. It seems Python version is better supported.
Comment applies to SDAPI client library, openZgy and OpenVDS.
- Different strategy used by Openzgy and OpenVDS libraries. @doniger commented - potential trade-off between performance and interoperability.
Swath-over from one implementation to anther should be seamless.
Paul Quinn (EA) - If we create issue for generic API, then we should clearly capture performance expextations.
Alan - Goals - ease of use, performance and inter-operability.
Debasis requested Alan to share Wellbore DDMS revision requirements in order to align with DDMS principles. Still pending from the Development team (Wellbore DDMS).
Paul - Recently uploaded to Gitlab. Will send the link.
Paul also said that we need to involve Development team (Seismic DDMS) to provide this level of functional and non-functional requirements.