[Gdal-dev] Radical OGR Update

[Frank Warmerdam]

Alessandro Amici wrote:
> if you are going to do a major restucture, even moving file around, a 1.2.0 
> branch will look more like a separate project that happen to reside inside 
> the same cvs than a real branch (that is, you will not able to merge stuff 
> anyhow).
> 
> however waiting 'a few months' untill 1.2.x is stable seems overkill to me. 
> since it is a dead-end anyhow, why not forking it at some stage (after the 
> 1.2.0 release) and put it into 'critical fixes only'. if it is better to fork 
> gdal in a cvs branch or in a copied cvs repository i'll leave to your 
> taste ;)

Alessandro,

I hate trying to keep track of what version changes go into when there are
branches other than the "development trunk".  I have seen branches cause
untold hassles in projects like GRASS and to a lesser extent in MapServer.

So, once I am ready to start restructuring I may create a 1.2 branch for
fixes to a "stable 1.2" series, but I won't if I can avoid it.  Restructuring
would happen in the trunk of course.

Best regards,
-- 
---------------------------------------+--------------------------------------
I set the clouds in motion - turn up   | Frank Warmerdam, warmerdam at pobox.com
light and sound - activate the windows | http://pobox.com/~warmerdam
and watch the world go round - Rush    | Geospatial Programmer for Rent