Le mercredi 19 octobre 2011 22:04:47, Etienne Tourigny a écrit : > Even, > > I've been thinking about this, and I knew you were going to prefer > incremental changes, as it would be preferable. However, there's > about a month of development in there and it would be quite difficult > to try to separate things in small chunks. > It will also be difficult because there has been significant > refactoring, due to the export of lon/lat values for projected crs. > Also if I commited all the changes (it's possible with my workflow), > there would be quite many patches and it would be difficult to follow. > > Probably what I will do is make a diff and see if I can break it up > into different parts. Perhaps I can separate import, export and misc > parts into separate commits - how about that? > I will wait a few days (we are still doing some benchmarks and final > testing) and then go through the commit process.
Sounds reasonable. But as I said, I would not want to set constraints on you on this. I'm well aware it can be costly. We have no rules on that, so it is left to your judgement. > > There will also be a significant refactoring for the adding of a > Create() function (just the export part), but I want to push through > these changes first. Sounds reasonable > > salutations, > Etienne > > On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 5:49 PM, Even Rouault > > <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > As PSC chair I will not be offended if you proceed with netcdf changes > >> > *without* a formal RFC type vote on the changes. The changes are > >> > fixing bugs and don't cause real backward compatability issues and > >> > I'm willing to treat you as the authority/owner for the driver. > >> > >> OK Frank, many thanks for you support and trust > > > > I also totally share Frank's opinion. All the efforts you have lead seem > > to have been carefully thought about and are well documented (in the > > wiki, but frmt_netcdf.html would perhaps need updates). Plus I'd have > > difficulties to vote for a RFC with an enlightened mind on such a > > specialized topic ;-) > > > > How will you proceed to updating in SVN ? A big code drop, or apply > > incremental changes ? Personnaly, I tend to prefer micro changes to be > > able to track regressions more easily, but it might be hard with the > > workflow you followed using git? I'd note that merging a svn branch in > > trunk would also loose incremental steps. That's just questions to > > satisfy my curiosity: I don't ask you to "rewrite history" as they seem > > to do in Linux kernel development. > > > >> > Best regards, > >> > -- > >> > ---------------------------------------+------------------------------ > >> > --- ----- I set the clouds in motion - turn up | Frank Warmerdam, > >> > [email protected] > >> > light and sound - activate the windows | http://pobox.com/warmerda > >> > and watch the world go round - Rush | Geospatial Software Developer > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> gdal-dev mailing list > >> [email protected] > >> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev _______________________________________________ gdal-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev
