+1 The old RFCs were useful but as you can get them from the wayback machine that is fine.
On Thu, Sep 19, 2024 at 4:35 PM Daniel Baston via gdal-dev < gdal-dev@lists.osgeo.org> wrote: > +1 > > Dan > > On Thu, Sep 19, 2024 at 3:34 PM Javier Jimenez Shaw via gdal-dev > <gdal-dev@lists.osgeo.org> wrote: > > > > I agree > > > > On Thu, 19 Sept 2024, 20:35 Even Rouault via gdal-dev, < > gdal-dev@lists.osgeo.org> wrote: > >> > >> Hi, > >> > >> I suggest we complete remove the content from > >> https://trac.osgeo.org/gdal/wiki. At this point, it is totally outdated > >> compared to gdal.org and useless for most people, and potentially > >> causing confusion if someone reaches it. People who would need to access > >> those outdated docs for their outdated GDAL builds can still use the > >> wayback machine (I've verified it did a decent job at crawling it). > >> > >> 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 > > > > _______________________________________________ > > gdal-dev mailing list > > gdal-dev@lists.osgeo.org > > https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev > _______________________________________________ > gdal-dev mailing list > gdal-dev@lists.osgeo.org > https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev >
_______________________________________________ gdal-dev mailing list gdal-dev@lists.osgeo.org https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev
