On 05/18/2012 08:51 PM, Frank Warmerdam wrote:
On Fri, May 18, 2012 at 10:35 AM, Ari Jolma<ari.jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
Folks,
The deadline for 2.0 is at the end of this year:
http://trac.osgeo.org/gdal/milestone/2.0.0
Ari,
Lets not take this deadline too seriously. If it takes
till summer 2013 for 2.0 that is ok (IMHO).
Deadlines are usually good ;)
but I have no problem with this. If it takes longer then it takes longer.
Is the RFC list the best source for what new features are planned for it?
This page is about smaller issues for 2.0:
http://trac.osgeo.org/gdal/wiki/GDAL20Changes
I have an old wish to have full XYZM support in GDAL and it would be a good
candidate to the plan for 2.0 - see also
http://www.mail-archive.com/gdal-dev@lists.osgeo.org/msg13470.html
Is anybody doing a review of what it would take?
I believe XYZM support would be a great feature for 2.0 and ideally
would be part of an upgrade to the more recent "simple features geometry"
model that includes various other geometry types.
I'm not sure who might want to take on this task though. It isn't
currently a focus of mine even though I'd like to see it happen.
We aren't really a Roadmap kind of project, but I welcome discussion
of things we would like to accomplish in 2.0 which is our opportunity
for substantial changes.
I could do two things:
Edit the "smaller issues" page to contain also larger issues (as the
link to it on the main page says).
Begin a XYZM RFC.
Ari
Best regards,
_______________________________________________
gdal-dev mailing list
gdal-dev@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev
