[gdal-dev] Motion: Approve RFC 33 - GeoTIFF - Fixing PixelIsPoint Interpretation

[Howard Butler]

On Nov 22, 2010, at 1:54 PM, Daniel Morissette wrote:

> Frank Warmerdam wrote:
>> 
>> Folks,
>> 
>> 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:
>> 
>>  http://trac.osgeo.org/gdal/wiki/rfc33_gtiff_pixelispoint
>> 
> 
> 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.
> 
> +1

+1

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 
/usr/local/include/gdal.h

for GDAL 1.8, we'd install in
/usr/local/include/gdal18/gdal.h

Do we need an RFC for this?

Howard