[postgis-devel] Regarding Raster RFC2 edit (r16452)

[Sandro Santilli]

Bborie, could you please revert your r16452 and discuss here
before such a change ?

Sorry Komzpa, I had a glitch with mail and made confusion.

--strk;

On Sun, Mar 11, 2018 at 07:58:35AM +0000, Darafei "Komяpa" Praliaskouski wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> https://trac.osgeo.org/postgis/changeset/16452 is performed by Bborie Park
> and not me.
> Can this be re-addressed? :)
> 
> вс, 11 мар. 2018 г. в 10:15, Sandro Santilli <strk at kbt.io>:
> 
> >
> > Komzpa I saw you modified RFC2-WellKnownBinaryFormat in r16452 but
> > didn't read any thread on postgis-devel reguarding the change.
> >
> > Those documents are important references and should be changed
> > lightly so please revert the change and propose changes on this
> > mailing list.
> >
> > Note that the header of the file contains revision information,
> > which you didn't update with your changes.
> >
> > Specifically your change shifted the last 2 "pixtype" values from
> > 9,10 to 10,10 thus leaving a gap in 9:
> >
> >  +---------------+--------------+-----------------------------------+
> >  | pixtype       | 4bits        | 0: 1-bit boolean                  |
> >  |               |              | 1: 2-bit unsigned integer         |
> >  |               |              | 2: 4-bit unsigned integer         |
> >  |               |              | 3: 8-bit signed integer           |
> >  |               |              | 4: 8-bit unsigned integer         |
> >  |               |              | 5: 16-bit signed integer          |
> >  |               |              | 6: 16-bit unsigned signed integer |
> >  |               |              | 7: 32-bit signed integer          |
> >  |               |              | 8: 32-bit unsigned signed integer |
> >  |               |              | 10: 32-bit float                  |
> >  |               |              | 11: 64-bit float                  |
> >  +---------------+--------------+-----------------------------------+
> >
> > Is it possible you're updating RFC to match some buggy code ?
> >
> > --strk;