[postgis-devel] Making postgis_comments.sql

[Kevin Neufeld]

Obe, Regina wrote:
> Kevin,
> Hmm that does sound like a good idea and doesn't sound too hard to pull 
> off (we might need to do a better job of standardizing the GEOS 
> requirement in the docs, but that's not a bad thing). 
> 
> I suppose all the functions that haven't been tagged
> in the docs as needing a specific GEOS version I can assume work for all 
> GEOS versions.
> 
> I'm not sure if we flagged all GEOS 3.1 and 3.0 functions.  I think the 
> 3.1s we did for sure.
> 

Yup, sounds like a plan to me.

> I still have reservations about spatial_ref_sys  - especially when you 
> are upgrading from something like 1.3 to 1.4 (I can see how this is just 
> a bad idea) as I personally have a lot of spatial_ref_sys entries that 
> aren't in the core and I wouldn't want to load that part plus it adds a 
> lot of weight to the file.

Oh, I'm not suggesting we merge spatial_ref_sys.  You're right, people often customize it to suite their own needs.  I'm 
just thinking of the basic postgis installation (tables, functions, datatypes, comments, etc..) could all go together. 
The actual population of the defined tables (like spatial_ref_sys) should remain separate.

-- Kevin