[gdal-dev] Motion: Approve RFC 33 - GeoTIFF - Fixing PixelIsPoint
hobu.inc at gmail.com
Mon Nov 22 15:30:05 EST 2010
On Nov 22, 2010, at 1:54 PM, Daniel Morissette wrote:
> Frank Warmerdam wrote:
>> I haven't seen any serious concerns with proceeding with this fix and I
>> have incorporated a few fixes. So now I'd like to motion to adopt RFC 33:
> I have to admit that it took me a few reads to (kind of) realize the
> implications this rfc, but since this is about aligning GDAL with the
> GeoTiff spec I think we have to bite the bullet and do it.
As long as we're approving (slightly) painful RFCs, what are people's thoughts on installing GDAL's includes by default in a number-prefixed directory instead of in the global directory?
For example, instead of installing in
for GDAL 1.8, we'd install in
Do we need an RFC for this?
More information about the gdal-dev