[gdal-dev] include paths and cmake

Daniel Morissette dmorissette at mapgears.com
Thu Nov 3 21:15:02 EDT 2011

Personally I like the idea. I'd probably go for the flattened version 
unless there is a good reason to carry a bunch of sub-directories around.

If there are any serious arguments against doing this then I'd like to 
hear them.


On 11-11-03 05:31 PM, Mateusz Łoskot wrote:
> On 3 November 2011 21:24, David Burken<dburken at comcast.net>  wrote:
>> Just wondering if you've thought about namespacing the include paths?  That
>> is:
>> #include "cpl_config.h"
>> #include "gdal_frmts.h"
>> Becomes:
>> #include<gdal/port/cpl_config.h>
>> #include<gdal/gcore/gdal_frmts.h>
>> Or (flattened):
>> #include<gdal/cpl_config.h>
>> #include<gdal/gdal_frmts.h>
> David,
> I thoroughly agree.
> Here is related ticket: http://trac.osgeo.org/gdal/ticket/3435
> IMHO, current way of installing headers is becoming inconvenient and
> unacceptable...
>> I realize this would be a big change.  Just thought since you're taking the
>> plunge on cmake it's something to consider.
> Yes, but I'm not a decision maker.
> I can only encourage to collect more critical mass and nudge GDAL PSC
> about this idea.
> Best regards,

Daniel Morissette
Provider of Professional MapServer Support since 2000

More information about the gdal-dev mailing list