Selon Ivan Lucena :
> > Date: Tue, 27 May 2014 11:46:35 +0200
> > From: even.roua...@mines-paris.org
> > To: mate...@loskot.net
> > CC: lucena_i...@hotmail.com; even.roua...@mines-paris.org;
> gdal-dev@lists.osgeo.org
> > Subject: Re: [gdal-dev] RFC 46 GDAL/OGR
> Date: Tue, 27 May 2014 11:46:35 +0200
> From: even.roua...@mines-paris.org
> To: mate...@loskot.net
> CC: lucena_i...@hotmail.com; even.roua...@mines-paris.org;
> gdal-dev@lists.osgeo.org
> Subject: Re: [gdal-dev] RFC 46 GDAL/OGR unification adopted and commited
>
> S
Selon Mateusz :
I'd rather see frmts/mixed/X if X is a single driver that can return
both raster and vector content.
If you have a X (GeoRaster) and YY (OGR OCI) drivers that use common
code but remain separate, I'd say you can have frmts/raster/X and
frmts/vector/Y and ma
On 27 May 2014 01:24, Ivan Lucena wrote:
> What I am most interested is to have two driver
> (that uses the same data container) sharing a little bit of code.
> [...]
> In my case I would like to have a folder structure to keep my two driver
> under the same folder.
>
> Something like that:
>
> /f
elp with your concern about a large number of
sub-folders under /frmts.
What do you think?
Regards,
Ivan
> From: mate...@loskot.net
> Date: Mon, 26 May 2014 17:36:49 +0200
> Subject: Re: [gdal-dev] RFC 46 GDAL/OGR unification adopted and commited
> To: even.roua...@mines-pa
On 26 May 2014 17:21, Even Rouault wrote:
> One thing that just came to my mind is if we want every drivers to stay under
> frmts, or if we want more structure like frmts/raster, frmts/vector,
> frmts/mixed.
IMO, the frmts folder as a single bag for all drivers will quickly become
difficult to na
Hi Ivan,
>
> The RFC 46 propose moving the OGR drivers from ogr/ogrsf_frmts/ to frmts/
> and I am looking forward to do that. When can we start?
When you want. There's no particularly emergency to do that IMHO, and the move
should be done properly with "svn mv", so that the traceability of files
; From: mate...@loskot.net
> To: gdal-dev@lists.osgeo.org
> Subject: Re: [gdal-dev] RFC 46 GDAL/OGR unification adopted and commited
>
> Hi,
>
> I can confirm the trunk builds without any problems with VS2013.
>
> Thanks Even!
>
> Best regards,
> Mateusz Loskot
&
Hi,
I can confirm the trunk builds without any problems with VS2013.
Thanks Even!
Best regards,
Mateusz Loskot
--
View this message in context:
http://osgeo-org.1560.x6.nabble.com/gdal-dev-RFC-46-GDAL-OGR-unification-adopted-and-commited-tp5142327p5142357.html
Sent from the GDAL - Dev
On Sat, May 24, 2014 at 4:54 PM, Even Rouault
wrote:
> Le samedi 24 mai 2014 21:28:39, Etienne Tourigny a écrit :
> > Hi Even, great work!
> >
> > Quick testing was fine and revealed no errors.
> >
> > I was able to compile it in QGIS master very easily. The only "issue" I
> > encountered was rela
Le samedi 24 mai 2014 21:28:39, Etienne Tourigny a écrit :
> Hi Even, great work!
>
> Quick testing was fine and revealed no errors.
>
> I was able to compile it in QGIS master very easily. The only "issue" I
> encountered was related to GDALRegisterAll() and OGRAllRegister()
> registering all dr
Hi Even, great work!
Quick testing was fine and revealed no errors.
I was able to compile it in QGIS master very easily. The only "issue" I
encountered was related to GDALRegisterAll() and OGRAllRegister()
registering all drivers (raster and vector), requiring to ignore the
vector-only drivers in
> Motion : I move to adopt RFC 46: GDAL/OGR unification
>
> http://trac.osgeo.org/gdal/wiki/rfc46_gdal_ogr_unification
>
Hi,
The motion has been adopted with support from PSC members JukkaR, FrankW,
DanielM, TamasS and myself.
The code has also been merged in trunk now. Version number upg
13 matches
Mail list logo
