[postgis-devel] liblwgeom.so

[Pierre Racine]

I would vote 0.

>From a Windows developer perspective all this build infrastructure is already a messy antiquity from the 80's. -10 for libtools and its friends!

Pierre

> -----Original Message-----
> From: postgis-devel-bounces at postgis.refractions.net [mailto:postgis-devel-
> bounces at postgis.refractions.net] On Behalf Of Paragon Corporation
> Sent: Friday, September 09, 2011 3:06 PM
> To: 'PostGIS Development Discussion'
> Subject: Re: [postgis-devel] liblwgeom.so
> 
> I vote -0.5, and, yes Bborie of course your vote counts.
> 
> Thanks,
> Regina
> 
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: postgis-devel-bounces at postgis.refractions.net
> > [mailto:postgis-devel-bounces at postgis.refractions.net] On Behalf Of
> > dustymugs
> > Sent: Friday, September 09, 2011 2:07 PM
> > To: PostGIS Development Discussion
> > Subject: Re: [postgis-devel] liblwgeom.so
> >
> > I'd have to vote -1.
> >
> > I think the change made is significant (like re-arranging a person's
> > internal organs) and should have been done in spike instead of trunk
> > until the PSC is comfortable merging it into trunk.
> >
> > The reason I'm against this change for PostGIS 2.0 (besides being a
> > conservative fellow) is that the other significant additions to
> > PostGIS prior to this change (enabling of gserialized and to a lesser
> > extent raster, geocoder and
> > topology) still needs testing and benchmarking.
> >
> > -bborie
> >
> > On 09/09/2011 10:58 AM, Paul Ramsey wrote:
> > > If you think it's dandy, tell us why! :) P.
> > >
> > > On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 10:55 AM,
> > dustymugs<dustymugs at gmail.com>  wrote:
> > >>> If I were asked to vote on it, I'd be -0. There are lots
> > of things I
> > >>> hate about the code base now, I can hate one more, if
> > everyone else
> > >>> thinks it's a dandy idea I won't veto, I have no monopoly on the
> > >>> truth, but I'd like us to actually poll the group and hear who
> > >>> *does* think it's a dandy idea and why.
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >> Paul,
> > >>
> > >> When you say "group", are you talking about PSC or all the
> > developers?
> > >>
> > >> -bborie
> > >> _______________________________________________
> > >> postgis-devel mailing list
> > >> postgis-devel at postgis.refractions.net
> > >> http://postgis.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/postgis-devel
> > >>
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > postgis-devel mailing list
> > > postgis-devel at postgis.refractions.net
> > > http://postgis.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/postgis-devel
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > postgis-devel mailing list
> > postgis-devel at postgis.refractions.net
> > http://postgis.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/postgis-devel
> >
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> postgis-devel mailing list
> postgis-devel at postgis.refractions.net
> http://postgis.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/postgis-devel