Justin Bronn wrote:
> The lazy geometries patch in 4322 is only a month old, and ten days
> ago I incorporated portions of your patch in r5448. Not exactly what
> I would consider "way off track" -- at least from my experience with
> open source projects. Regardless, I'll concede that GDAL featu
Justin Bronn wrote:
> The lazy geometries patch in 4322 is only a month old, and ten days
> ago I incorporated portions of your patch in r5448. Not exactly what
> I would consider "way off track" -- at least from my experience with
> open source projects. Regardless, I'll concede that GDAL featu
> For instance, the lazy geometries patch in 4322 is way off
> track now we have support for ogr geometries.
The lazy geometries patch in 4322 is only a month old, and ten days
ago I incorporated portions of your patch in r5448. Not exactly what
I would consider "way off track" -- at least from
GIS people,
There don't seem to be any plans around how the gis branch is getting to
its goals. For instance, the lazy geometries patch in 4322 is way off
track now we have support for ogr geometries. I'm happy to write
code/docs/tests, but it helps if i can see a little way into the future
a
