[gdal-dev] Motion: RFC 78: gdal-utils package

[Kurt Schwehr]

+0  KurtS

I have some vague undefined unease about this.  Even's comments help
diminish that some.  I don't see strong enough arguments for me to vote for
it.

On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 12:03 PM Even Rouault <even.rouault at spatialys.com>
wrote:

> Hi Idan,
>
>
> Motion:
>
> Adopt RFC 78: gdal-utils package
> <https://github.com/talos-gis/gdal/blob/Branch_rfc78_py_modules/gdal/doc/source/development/rfc/rfc78_gdal_utils_package.rst> (formatted
> version).
>
> +1.
>
> Sorry for the late reply.
>
> I'd like some efforts on the documentation front regarding this new
> addition. The new doc page hhttps://gdal.org/api/python.html (initiated
> from the swig/python/README.rst. not sure how we could avoid duplication of
> content in the tree. perhaps some inclusion of README.rst from the docs)
> would need to be enriched with details from the RFC, to explain how the 2
> pypi packages relate, and the potential issues in the workflows you
> indicate.
>
> The HOWTO-RELEASE procedure will likely need to be adjusted.
>
> I'll appreciate too that you actively support users in github issues /
> email traffic on this topic once this is deployed in a release.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Even
> --
>
> http://www.spatialys.com
> My software is free, but my time generally not.
>
> _______________________________________________
> gdal-dev mailing list
> gdal-dev at lists.osgeo.org
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/gdal-dev/attachments/20210324/b0b6d032/attachment.html>