[geos-devel] Geos 2.2.3 vs. 3.0.0

[Mike Leahy]

Paul,

Thanks for the response.  Going with the flow is certainly preferable, 
but I'd rather avoid bugs down the road if I can.  After looking at the 
bug tracker, it looks like there are quite a few major/critical bugs 
that were fixed in 3.0.  Is it only those bugs with 2.2.x specified as 
the version that I should look at?  Sorry if that's an obvious question 
- I just want to make a semi-educated decision about what problems I 
might encounter if I stick with 2.2.3.

Regards,
Mike

Paul Ramsey wrote:
> Mike,
> 
> The significance of the changes is all in your perception and use. If 
> you happen to hit a geometry bug in 2.2, then 3.0 becomes much more 
> significant to you.
> 
> I'd suggest "going with the flow". Use what you have as default until 
> such a time as it doesn't do what you want or need.
> 
> Paul
> 
> On Feb 14, 2008, at 3:17 PM, Mike Leahy wrote:
> 
>> I'm setting up a new server that in the not-too-distant future will be 
>> used for some live project work.  I'm currently running Fedora 8, and 
>> I find that most of the GIS-related utilities we need are available 
>> from the default Fedora repositories.  However, the Geos in the Fedora 
>> repositories is still at version 2.2.3.  I don't know how likely that 
>> is to change in the near future, but I'm guessing it might be a while 
>> (if at all for Fedora 8) given the number of dependencies that would 
>> also have to be updated (Gdal, Qgis, MapServer, etc.).
>>
>> What I'd like to know is whether the improvements in 3.0.0 are 
>> significant enough to make it worthwhile for me to go through the 
>> process of compiling it myself (plus all of the dependant tools).  
>> This isn't too difficult for me to do, but it is time consuming, and 
>> I'd rather rely on binaries complied and tested by those with more 
>> expertise than I have.  Alternatively, I can stick with 2.2.3 (and 
>> maybe hope for updates on F8), or consider another distribution that 
>> has Geos 3.0.0 already distributed with it (does anyone know if this 
>> is the case, maybe for CentOS?).
>>
>> What recommendations would anyone on this list have?
> 
>