[postgis-devel] postgis extension sans raster (only for folks who can't compile with raster support) - PSC Vote and developer/packager comments please

[Bborie Park]

The raster component doesn't require QT, so there is something else amiss
in FreeBSD.

I'm indifferent but I'll admit that I compile everything myself for all my
use-cases of PostGIS as every package built for Ubuntu (12.04, 14.04) cause
me issues in the end.

+0

-bborie

On Sat, Oct 24, 2015 at 11:14 AM, Paragon Corporation <lr at pcorp.us> wrote:

> One FreeBSD packager brought up that they can't compile PostGIS with raster
> support because of the QT dependency it drags in among others.  I still
> don't quite understand why that's a big deal.
>
> Anyway people complain because then they can't install postgis with
>
> CREATE EXTENSION postgis;
>
>
> Like everyone else.  I've seen similar complaints with Homebrew folks who
> compile their own.
>
> Rather than splitting raster out of postgis as many have proposed and
> causing an upgrade mess for everybody , I propose this:
>
> https://trac.osgeo.org/postgis/ticket/3338
>
> In a nutshell: encode the lack of raster in the postgis version number
> rather than the extension name itself.  This approach has the following
> benefits (repeated from the ticket):
> We still have raster as the default behavior and people still need to say
> explicitly without-raster during configure.
>
>
> 1)    Most extensions that rely on PostGIS just use the vector portion, so
> keeping the name the same they can continue on without having to change
> their requires statement (changing requires is huge mess particularly for
> extensions like pgRouting since then they'd have a different requires for
> new PostGIS than older and they support 3 versions of each PostGIS minor)
>
> Not to mention a huge mess for all the documentation already out there.
>
>  2)   We have the same set of instructions for everybody:
>
> CREATE EXTENSION postgis;
>
>
> 3)    With the version differentiator it's trivial to upgrade a half-baked
> version 2.3.0-no-raster to a full yummy 2.3.0 version. We just add upgrade
> scripts to go from 2.3.0-no-raster to 2.3.0 regular postgis  (which is
> pretty trivial exercise)
>
> 4)    Similarly we can have a 2.3.0--2.3.0-no-raster that gets installed if
> you compile without raster support. Which will drop all the raster
> functions
> during the upgrade.
>
> 5)    It's fairly trivial to do compared to returning not supported I was
> thinking of before.
>
>
> What do folks think about this? Am I nuts or is this a great idea?
>
> If all are for it, I'm willing to do the work to make it happen for 2.3.0
>
> Thanks,
> Regina
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> postgis-devel mailing list
> postgis-devel at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/postgis-devel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/postgis-devel/attachments/20151024/c9e076c6/attachment.html>