[gdal-dev] Should the next version (previously 2.5) be called GDAL 3.0 ?

[Frank Warmerdam]

Even,

I think calling it 3.0 would be reasonable.

Best regards,
Frank


On Wed, May 1, 2019 at 11:56 AM Even Rouault <even.rouault at spatialys.com>
wrote:

> Hi,
>
>
> As a feedback from the previous motion, it appears that GDAL 3.0 would
>
> probably better reflect the API & behaviour changes that have been done,
> and
>
> be in accordance with our HOWTO-RELEASE procedure and semantic versionning
>
> rules.
>
>
> I'm OK with that change.
>
>
> If we decide for that, the plan would probably be:
>
> - change in docs & other materials the references to 2.5 to 3.0
>
> - create a release/3.0 branch from the HEAD of release/2.5
>
> - abandon release/2.5 branch (that is: backports would be done in
> release/3.0,
>
> and for longer support in release/2.4 when appropriate)
>
> - issue a 3.0.0RC1 from that
>
> - call master 3.1dev
>
>
> Thoughts ?
>
>
> Even
>
>
> --
> Spatialys - Geospatial professional services
> http://www.spatialys.com
> _______________________________________________
> gdal-dev mailing list
> gdal-dev at lists.osgeo.org
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev



-- 
---------------------------------------+--------------------------------------
I set the clouds in motion - turn up   | Frank Warmerdam,
warmerdam at pobox.com
light and sound - activate the windows |
and watch the world go round - Rush    | Geospatial Software Developer
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/gdal-dev/attachments/20190501/f975b221/attachment.html>