Joaquim, Please give it another go at explaining what this use case is and the issues with it. I didn't follow your comments about the need for VS2013. If users are on a legacy compiler (w.r.t. to C++11), can they not be served by the 2.2 branch? How does that use case fair with the impending GEOS 3.7.0 requiring a minimum of C++11?
Thanks, -kurt P.S. Doesn't really matter, but here is where I upped the version for VS on Aug 14 after some discussion with Even: https://trac.osgeo.org/gdal/wiki/rfc68_cplusplus11?action=diff&version=9&old_version=8 On Wed, Sep 6, 2017 at 11:23 AM, Mateusz Loskot <[email protected]> wrote: > On 6 September 2017 at 20:18, Joaquim Luis <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Wed, 06 Sep 2017 18:34:06 +0100, Mateusz Loskot <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> On 6 September 2017 at 19:14, Joaquim Luis <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> > >>> Wait, does this means that VS2013 will no longer be supported? > >> > >> With respect, Kurt has been asking for comments for very long time. > > > > Yes that's true, but always understood that VS2013 would be the minimum. > > Kurt posted [1] updated RFC 68 three weeks ago. > It would be enough to have a glance to see VS2015. > > [1] https://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/gdal-dev/2017-August/046951.html > > Best regards, > -- > Mateusz Loskot, http://mateusz.loskot.net > -- -- http://schwehr.org
_______________________________________________ gdal-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev
