[geos-devel] Backporting geosop?

[Martin Davis]

On Tue, Feb 23, 2021 at 11:55 AM Daniel Baston <dbaston at gmail.com> wrote:

> I think a safer and lower-maintenance solution would be to write it in
> such a way that it can link to multiple versions of GEOS, rather than
> developing it in parallel across four branches.
>

Perhaps, but no time to do that now.

>
> If it is backported I think it is reasonable for the build warnings to be
> cleared up first.
>

Agreed.


> It should probably be disabled by default in stable branches to avoid
> introducing an unforeseen build problem.
>

Agreed.

Also, the 3.6 branch uses C++98, so features such as lambdas and unique_ptr
> cannot be used, unless the build system is configured to use C++11 for
> geosop and C++98 for the remainder. Any changes to the build system should
> also work with the minimum CMake version for those branches (3.0 for the
> 3.6 branch).
>

I am not intending to backport to 3.6

>
> Dan
>
> On Tue, Feb 23, 2021 at 2:16 PM Martin Davis <mtnclimb at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hey GEOS devs,
>>
>> I'm thinking about committing back-ported versions of geosop to 3.9, 3.8
>> and 3.7.
>>
>> Any objections?  And any further objections if I don't bother with the
>> autotools build setup?
>> _______________________________________________
>> geos-devel mailing list
>> geos-devel at lists.osgeo.org
>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geos-devel
>>
> _______________________________________________
> geos-devel mailing list
> geos-devel at lists.osgeo.org
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geos-devel
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/geos-devel/attachments/20210223/1b234ef9/attachment.html>