On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 12:23 PM, Régis Haubourg <[email protected]> wrote:
> Thanks for all your pointers. > > Discussing with Paul Blottiere and Hugo Mercier, we can give some global > aswers: > > - We didn't think about GPKG, because in the end there was no need to > spatial data. Please remember that more than 6 months ago, GPKG wasn't as > promoted and tested than now. > > - Changing the OGR SQLITE provider to GOKG OGR provider shouldn't be too > much work. The hardest part was synchronizing ancillary data with source > layer. > > - Spatialite provider is absolutely not a requirement. We tried to use it > and it appeared too messy concerning featureId's and Primary keys too. Init > creation option were not exposed in API to be able to quickly create a > small DB. More largely on spatialite provider, and seeing Luigi's pointer > to current Spatialite Pull Request, we really think we should only use OGR > and mutualize all efforts there to have a unique and robust provider. > > Sorry, I don't want to hijack the thread but I couldn't agree more on your last point! I'm convinced that we should use OGR/GDAL whenever possible, and when it's not: try hard to contribute to OGR/GDAL to remove the blocker. -- Alessandro Pasotti w3: www.itopen.it
_______________________________________________ QGIS-Developer mailing list [email protected] List info: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer Unsubscribe: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
