[PROJ] Motion: Adopt RFC3 - Dependency management

[Thomas Knudsen]

While improving, I think that the MSVC support of C99 is still incomplete,
which could be a showstopper for going full C99

Den ons. 16. jan. 2019 kl. 15.46 skrev Kristian Evers <kreve at sdfe.dk>:

> Well, we *could* do that, but since we already have a few functions that
> return int
> instead of bool it would be more consistent to continue that pattern. I
> don't have
> strong opinion on the matter. I am curious to know though if there is any
> users
> of PROJ following the list that has a strict C89 requirement?
>
> /Kristian
>
> -----Oprindelig meddelelse-----
> Fra: Even Rouault <even.rouault at spatialys.com>
> Sendt: 16. januar 2019 15:31
> Til: proj at lists.osgeo.org
> Cc: Kristian Evers <kreve at sdfe.dk>
> Emne: Re: [PROJ] Motion: Adopt RFC3 - Dependency management
>
> Hi,
>
> there's a point that came to mind suddenly. About C99 adoption, that mean
> that
> we could use the 'bool' type in the C API for example. Do we want to do
> that ?
> The adverse consequence would be for third-party code using PROJ API and
> building with C89 only.
>
> Even
>
> > With +1 from Kristian, Even, Thomas and Howard I declare the motion
> passed.
> >
> > /Kristian
> >
> > Fra: Howard Butler <howard at hobu.co>
> > Sendt: 14. januar 2019 16:08
> > Til: Thomas Knudsen <knudsen.thomas at gmail.com>
> > Cc: Kristian Evers <kreve at sdfe.dk>; PROJ <proj at lists.osgeo.org>
> > Emne: Re: [PROJ] Motion: Adopt RFC3 - Dependency management
> >
> > +1 Howard
> >
> >
> >
> > On Jan 14, 2019, at 5:26 AM, Thomas Knudsen
> > <knudsen.thomas at gmail.com<mailto:knudsen.thomas at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> > +1 Thomas
> >
> > Den man. 14. jan. 2019 kl. 12.14 skrev Even Rouault
> > <even.rouault at spatialys.com<mailto:even.rouault at spatialys.com>>:
>  On lundi
> > 14 janvier 2019 10:20:11 CET Kristian Evers wrote:
> >
> > > PSC members,
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > RFC3 about dependency management has been up for review for quite some
> > > time
>  now. Since no comments has been reviewed since the last I update I
> > > regard this as ready for a vote by the PSC.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > The RFC is available here: https://github.com/OSGeo/proj.4/pull/1168
> > > <https://github.com/OSGeo/proj.4/pull/1168>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > I’ll start with my +1.
> >
> >
> > +1 Even
> >
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > /Kristian
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Spatialys - Geospatial professional services
> > http://www.spatialys.com<http://www.spatialys.com/>
> > _______________________________________________
> > PROJ mailing list
> > PROJ at lists.osgeo.org<mailto:PROJ at lists.osgeo.org>
> > https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/proj
> > _______________________________________________
> > PROJ mailing list
> > PROJ at lists.osgeo.org<mailto:PROJ at lists.osgeo.org>
> > https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/proj
> >
>
>
> --
> Spatialys - Geospatial professional services
> http://www.spatialys.com
> _______________________________________________
> PROJ mailing list
> PROJ at lists.osgeo.org
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/proj
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/proj/attachments/20190116/acb6b6c1/attachment.html>