On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 1:14 PM, Even Rouault <even.roua...@mines-paris.org>wrote:
> > > Currently we have no such breakage in trunk so it could qualify as GDAL > 1.11. > Perhaps we should just release it as such for now before the bigger > changes ? > Even, I think that 2.0 could be kept for breaking changes, and that if we aren't going to accomplish those big projects we should just aim for a 1.11 release. > > Somes topics I can see for GDAL 2.0 that impact API/ABI : > - well, the mythological unification of OGR driver model with GDAL driver > model. > - XYZM support > - Curve geometries > - 64 bit integer support > I think the above could potentially justify a 2.0 release. I think a change to github or cmake do not because they don't affect applications using GDAL. Best regards, Frank > Other possible structural changes : > - Change of master version control system: switch to git / GitHub ? > - New build system : cmake ? > > Of course all of this will more likely happen if contributors or funders > show > up ! > > Even > > -- > Geospatial professional services > http://even.rouault.free.fr/services.html > _______________________________________________ > gdal-dev mailing list > gdal-dev@lists.osgeo.org > http://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 | http://pobox.com/~warmerdam and watch the world go round - Rush | Geospatial Software Developer
_______________________________________________ gdal-dev mailing list gdal-dev@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev
