Folks, At one time we were very sensitive to the exact version of SWIG so providing pre-generated bindings removed a large class of versioning problems.
I am ok with removing them. Best regards, Frank On Thu, Mar 9, 2023 at 3:14 PM Even Rouault <even.roua...@spatialys.com> wrote: > > > To play devil's advocate, were there any (perceived) benefits to this > > arrangement when originally introduced, other than not needing the > > SWIG binary to compile Python bindings? > > That predates the start of my involvement with GDAL, so my guess would > be that this was just what you mention: for the sake of simplicity of > people building GDAL, at a time where its only build requirement was the > basic tools autoconf, make and g++. Nowadays, getting SWIG isn't harder > than getting PROJ or any of the "optional" dependencies you generally > want to make a reasonably feature complete GDAL build. > > Even > > -- > http://www.spatialys.com > My software is free, but my time generally not. > > _______________________________________________ > gdal-dev mailing list > gdal-dev@lists.osgeo.org > https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev > -- ---------------------------------------+-------------------------------------- I set the clouds in motion - turn up | Frank Warmerdam, warmer...@pobox.com light and sound - activate the windows | +1 650-701-7823 and watch the world go round - Rush | Geospatial Software Developer
_______________________________________________ gdal-dev mailing list gdal-dev@lists.osgeo.org https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev