Sounds to me like there's a preference for Bas' idea. Let's keep the incremented SONAME and move forward using semantic versioning as Bas suggests.
Mike, can you do the necessary changes in the CMake setup? /Kristian > -----Original Message----- > From: Mike Taves <[email protected]> > Sent: 17. februar 2022 11:01 > To: Kristian Evers <[email protected]> > Cc: Sebastiaan Couwenberg <[email protected]>; [email protected] > Subject: Re: [PROJ] PROJ 9.0.0RC1 & PROJ-data 1.9RC1 > > On Thu, 17 Feb 2022 at 22:35, Kristian Evers via PROJ > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Thanks for the thorough explanation, Bas. It's much appreciated! > > > > Even, Mike: I haven't got strong opinions on this. Do you guys think it is > > worth the hassle to switch to the model Bas describes here? > > Thanks for the ideas Bas! I like it, as it's much simpler to see one > incrementer. > > If we decide to keep the incremented SONAME, then yes, let's implement > a simpler versioning for PROJ 9.0RC2. But if we decide to keep the > previous SONAME (due to no API/ABI break), then keep it libtool-style > until the next API/ABI break. _______________________________________________ PROJ mailing list [email protected] https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/proj
