Just have to make sure we communicate this via the blog and why. On Thu, Nov 28, 2019 at 10:38 AM Mathieu Pellerin <[email protected]> wrote:
> +1 to end 3.4 cycle a few months early too. > > On Thu, Nov 28, 2019, 05:57 Nathan Woodrow <[email protected]> wrote: > >> +1 on dropping support early as the risk is large on breaking the users >> experience with a LTR >> >> On Thu., 28 Nov. 2019, 8:55 am Even Rouault, <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> > I think the issues are deeper then the crashes/projection failures >>> > fixed by the GDAL/proj cherry-picked commits. >>> >>> Yes, actually QGIS 3.4 should not be affected by the PROJ fix, because >>> it >>> uses the old pj_transform() API with doesn't trigger that code path at >>> all. >>> But it *is* affected by exportToProj4() no longer returning +datum or >>> +towgs84 >>> in cases where it used to be, which basically makes working with >>> anything != >>> WGS 84 fundamentaly broken. The only "fix" would be to backport the >>> fully >>> fledged PROJ 6 support of 3.10 which is obviously unreasonable to do in >>> 3.4 >>> >>> > think we SHOULD drop >>> > Windows LTR support early rather than releasing a 3.4 build based on >>> > proj6/gdal3. >>> >>> +1 >>> >>> -- >>> Spatialys - Geospatial professional services >>> http://www.spatialys.com >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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 >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 > >
_______________________________________________ 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
