[Live-demo] Re: adding postgis 1.4

[Hamish]

Brian wrote:
>   12 hours ago mleslie looked more carefully at the PostGIS 1.4
> installer script after examining it he agreed with the conclusion
> pramsey came to by only considering it that it is perfectly safe
> to add


Hi Brian,

the issue is not about the code quality of the new postgis release
nor the quality of the install script. (I'm sure both are fine and
am glad to hear that it has seen Mark & Paul's review)

It is rather the indirect interaction of those with the rest of the
system. e.g. the extra build packages it adds and removes as part of
the compile effort -- I have spent many hours in the last few days
trying to resolve those conflicts already and I don't look forward to
adding any more variables to the equation with no more time left on
the clock.  -dev packages conflict a lot more than standard do.

As there will be no more official betas before the final build, if you
(or anyone else) can provide the following, for my part I'd be
cautiously satisfied (but again this is the group's decision, not mine) -

 * build the complete live dvd from the latest SVN and post the build
logs for review.

 * get the blessing of the pgRouting and Mapnik folks. (ie the other
PostGIS stakeholders)

 * a listing of what 'make install' copies into the filesystem.
e.g. as I understand it there will be two different versions of
shp2pgsql and pgsql2shp installed, v1.3 in /usr/bin, v1.4 in
/usr/local/bin; and to show that all .so-names are unique.


I'd rather go on the evidence, but if the group decides to accept the
risk as-is, I'd be ok with that too.


regards,
Hamish