[Qgis-developer] [gdal-dev] GDAL 2.2.0 beta 2 available

[Nathan Woodrow]

Yeah don't change anything like this in a LTR. It's not a good idea for
trust.

On Tue, 25 Apr 2017, 5:24 PM Matthias Kuhn <matthias at opengis.ch> wrote:

> > Please don't. Embedded code copies are a PITA. QGIS has too many of
> those already (although they're generally not required).
>
> I agree in general. I think this case here is a bit different, given
> that this is already partially present (in a particularly cumbersome and
> incomplete way) and is going to be phased out soon.
>
> >>> 5) require GDAL < 2.2 for building QGIS 2.18
> > What about
> >
> > 6) #ifdef the offending plugin out in 2.18 for GDAL >= 2.2?
>
> If that's going to be done I would update that to error out in CMake
> with an incompatiblity error and force the packager to make a decision
> (actively disable dxf2shp or pin GDAL to the older version).
>
> Which decision would you propose for the packages provided upstream
> (like OSGeo4W)?
>
> >
> > Given that the plugin is removed in QGIS 3.0 anyway, I think early
> > retirement is a perfectly valid option. It's also the best option for
> > GDAL, and avoids any wasted effort temporarily fixing code which only
> > has a short time left to live anyway...
>
> I was thinking the same, but breaking peoples workflows in patch
> releases is a good way to undermine the trust in LTR.
>
> Matthias
>
> _______________________________________________
> Qgis-developer mailing list
> Qgis-developer at lists.osgeo.org
> List info: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-developer/attachments/20170425/ff5f91c5/attachment.html>