I've just been testing GDAL/OGR 1.11.0 and the MBTiles driver does not seem to
be reading transparency information. Not sure if this is new to 1.11.0 or was
an issue there before. Ticket here:
http://trac.osgeo.org/gdal/ticket/5439
Cheers,
Jeremy
This message contains information, which may be
> Code reviews would be another way to prevent accidental
> segfaults, but we might not have enough people with enough time for that,
> and some people might not want it. I personally love when someone reviews
> my code.
Code reviews are of course good for quality. I think any GDAL committer shoul
> Ok, no need for it then. Do you want me to roll my changes back from the
> 1.11 branch or apply my patch to it?
You can apply your patch on 1.11 as well. It will be stacked for a potential new
RC, or a 1.11.1 release.
I'm still ambivalent about regnerating a new RC, just to incorporate the spat
On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 3:01 PM, Even Rouault
wrote:
> > I suppose, but the problem is that without it the whole thing becomes
> > useless for large datasets (> 100k features) due to GME restrictions. I
> > just thought that it would be good to have a GME driver that works on
> those
> > large tab
Hi Daniel,
I agree with your idea about formalizing, and do indeed feel sorry for
adding to Even's workload. I think it's a good thing to talk about,
especially now, for obvious reasons. Making new GDAL releases should be
made as easy as possible, and I think that a more formal structure, like
the
Hi Wolf,
Once again my mail was aimed at all of us committers and not just you
specifically. Your contributions (like everyone else's) are much welcome
and I would not want to discourage anyone from contributing. FWIW I
don't think there was ever a formal code freeze call for GDAL, so you
did
Yeah, I should not have tried to push this so late yesterday. For that I'm
sorry, and I'm fixing it now. I can only apologize.
Daniel, you bring up a good point. A more formal release process might be
in order, we are maybe starting to reach critical mass in developers here,
or else it's just me m
On 14-04-17 9:01 AM, Even Rouault wrote:
The problem is that at some point we must take a snapshot and say "hey, this is
GDAL 1.11, the latest and greatest, use it please". I think it is OK if new
drivers are still a bit experimental.
Reviewing the commit, I think that it has at least one issue
On 14-04-17 9:56 AM, Daniel Morissette wrote:
For reference, MapServer RFC34 documents the release process:
http://msgsoc.mapgears.com/html/en/development/rfc/ms-rfc-34.html
OOppss. The URL above points to a mirror of the site. Here is the
official URL to RFC 34:
http://mapserver.org/devel
Selon Wolf Bergenheim :
> On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 9:56 AM, Even Rouault
> wrote:
>
> > Selon Wolf Bergenheim :
> >
> > > I just added a critical fix gor the GME driver that I'd like to get in to
> > > 1.11, so I merged it to the 1.11 branch. Soo technically this might
> > require
> > > a new RC, s
On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 9:56 AM, Even Rouault
wrote:
> Selon Wolf Bergenheim :
>
> > I just added a critical fix gor the GME driver that I'd like to get in to
> > 1.11, so I merged it to the 1.11 branch. Soo technically this might
> require
> > a new RC, sorry for that!
>
> I'd like to kindly remi
Selon Wolf Bergenheim :
> I just added a critical fix gor the GME driver that I'd like to get in to
> 1.11, so I merged it to the 1.11 branch. Soo technically this might require
> a new RC, sorry for that!
I'd like to kindly remind to GDAL committers that any commit worth to go to a
branch must b
I just added a critical fix gor the GME driver that I'd like to get in to
1.11, so I merged it to the 1.11 branch. Soo technically this might require
a new RC, sorry for that!
On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 11:11 PM, Even Rouault wrote:
> Hi,
>
> After one beta, the first release candidate for GDAL/OG
Hi,
After one beta, the first release candidate for GDAL/OGR 1.11.0 is ready.
Please test and report any problems promptly. Soon I will initiate a motion to
declare this release candidate the final release and PSC members can vote on
that after doing some checks themselves.
Source Code:
http
14 matches
Mail list logo
