[PROJ] Motion: approve RFC3 update, and bump to C++17 for PROJ 9.6

[Even Rouault]

Le 07/01/2025 à 04:37, Alan Snow a écrit :
> At first glance, it seems reasonable. Though I have a couple of 
> questions for clarification.
>
> Would it make sense to word the RFC so we prefer making dependency 
> changes on major releases, but exceptions can be made? For example, if 
> the dependency charge can be classified as a minor change and will 
> cause minimal disruptions, then an exception can be made.
>
> What were the reasons for originally wanting to only apply dependency 
> updates for major releases? How do we plan to ensure the original 
> reasons are not overlooked for minor releases?

IMHO spending more time fine-tuning RFC-3 is not worth it. Our usual 
communication mechanisms, pull requests or messages on this list, and 
seeking for enough consensus, and making a motion if needed, are enough 
to handle those situations.

-- 
http://www.spatialys.com
My software is free, but my time generally not.
Butcher of all kinds of standards, open or closed formats. At the end, this is just about bytes.