[gdal-dev] 1.9 Release Process

Pirmin Kalberer pi_ml at sourcepole.com
Sat Dec 17 12:40:02 EST 2011


Am Freitag, 16. Dezember 2011, 21.04:13 schrieb Even Rouault:
> Le vendredi 16 décembre 2011 15:48:30, Pirmin Kalberer a écrit :
> > Hi Frank, all
> > 
> > Am Mittwoch, 14. Dezember 2011, um 08.31:22 schrieb Frank Warmerdam:
> > > Folks,
> > > 
> > > I would like to have a GDAL/OGR 1.9 release by the end of this year,
> > > ideally before Christmas.  We have not formalized a release process
> > > for the project, but I'd like to follow the approach of past years.
> > > This basically consists of a few beta releases, followed by a
> > > release
> > > candidate when things seem to be in good shape.  The release
> > > candidates
> > > would be voted on by the PSC before becoming official.
> > > 
> > > Anyone with significant work they would like to accomplish before
> > > 1.9.0
> > > should reply to this thread with information on the planned work.
> > 
> > I've created a patch adding read support for shapefile measure values:
> > http://trac.osgeo.org/gdal/ticket/2374
> > If someone could review the patch, I would like to include it in trunk
> > for the 1.9.0 release.
> 
> Pirmin,
> 
> I see you just report the M coordinate as the Z coordinate. I feel that the
> approach proposed is a bit hackish... There should be a way for the user to
> know if it is M or Z that he gets. IMHO, the right approach would be to
> implement proper M support in OGR Geometry classes, and that the Shapefile
> driver uses a specific method to set M values. I see there's explicit M
> support in the OGC OpenGIS Implementation Specification for Geographic
> information - Simple feature access - Part 1: Common architecture

Hi Even,

Would be nice to have full support for XYM and XYZM geometries. I don't know 
how much work it would require. This minimalistic support for XYM geometries 
was discussed a few times in the last years and it's better than nothing IMHO.
Talking about extending the internal OGR data model, support for multiple 
geometries in a layer would have much higher priority for me...

Regards
Pirmin

-- 
Pirmin Kalberer
Sourcepole  -  Linux & Open Source Solutions
http://www.sourcepole.com



More information about the gdal-dev mailing list