Time for a new release?

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
45 messages Options
123
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Time for a new release?

Kristian Evers-2

All,

 

I think the current development cycle is coming to an end and a new release should be made. It’s been more than a year since that least release of PROJ.4. In that period of time the library has improved significantly, most notably by the introduction of a new and more consistent API, transformation pipelines and the cct 4D transformation CLI utility. The new additions have already seen a fair amount of testing and are now at a point where I believe they are stable enough to be released to the public. I would like to propose that we release the next version of PROJ.4 on December 15. This gives roughly a month to take care of the last few kinks that need to be ironed out. It also gives users of the library amble time to test the developing version in the setups and report any issues that have appeared since the last release. With a release mid-december we should aim for a release candidate in the start of December.

 

I hope we all agree that the time has come to get a new release out there. Please voice your opinions on this matter.

 

Howard, I guess you will be doing some/most of the heavy lifting with preparing the actual release, so please feel free to propose another time if this doesn’t fit your schedule.

 

/Kristian


_______________________________________________
Proj mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.maptools.org/mailman/listinfo/proj
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Time for a new release?

Roger Bivand
Could I please ask that the version in master be set to a value sorting after
the current release? It doesn't have to be the actual value, but for
downstream testing, it would be really convenient not to see the same value
as the current release.

Roger



-----
Roger Bivand
NHH Norwegian School of Economics, Bergen, Norway
--
Sent from: http://osgeo-org.1560.x6.nabble.com/PROJ-4-f3840930.html
_______________________________________________
Proj mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.maptools.org/mailman/listinfo/proj
Roger Bivand
NHH Norwegian School of Economics, Bergen, Norway
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Time for a new release?

Kristian Evers-2
I agree, that is something we should handle better after the next release.

Kristian

-----Oprindelig meddelelse-----
Fra: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] På vegne af Roger Bivand
Sendt: 9. november 2017 13:23
Til: [hidden email]
Emne: Re: [Proj] Time for a new release?

Could I please ask that the version in master be set to a value sorting after
the current release? It doesn't have to be the actual value, but for
downstream testing, it would be really convenient not to see the same value
as the current release.

Roger



-----
Roger Bivand
NHH Norwegian School of Economics, Bergen, Norway
--
Sent from: http://osgeo-org.1560.x6.nabble.com/PROJ-4-f3840930.html
_______________________________________________
Proj mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.maptools.org/mailman/listinfo/proj
_______________________________________________
Proj mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.maptools.org/mailman/listinfo/proj
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Time for a new release?

Greg Troxel-2

Kristian Evers <[hidden email]> writes:

-----Oprindelig meddelelse-----
> Fra: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] På vegne af Roger Bivand
> Sendt: 9. november 2017 13:23
> Til: [hidden email]
> Emne: Re: [Proj] Time for a new release?
>
> Could I please ask that the version in master be set to a value sorting after
> the current release? It doesn't have to be the actual value, but for
> downstream testing, it would be really convenient not to see the same value
> as the current release.

> I agree, that is something we should handle better after the next release.
>
> Kristian

I think the point is to change master now, so that packages built from
master will sort properly.

Currently we have 4.9.3.   Presumably the release is going to be 4.10 or
5.0 (absent anything drastic, 4.10 seems obviously right).

So, master can be changed right now to 4.9.80, following an ancient
scheme, which is understood to be an alpha of the next real release
after 4.9.  It sorts before 4.10, and after 4.9.3 (and is obviously not
4.9.4).

Part of a release cycle is packagers preparing a package from a tarball
created from master, building that package, and testing it.  It's that
process that is almost certainly driving Roger's request.

The other thing that really helps is for the release tarball creation
process to be scripted and repeatable, with no manual steps, so that
packagers can create them for testing, and be sure that the actual
release will be identical (modulo intentionally changed content).

Greg (who looks after proj in pkgsrc)

_______________________________________________
Proj mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.maptools.org/mailman/listinfo/proj

signature.asc (167 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Time for a new release?

Howard Butler-3
In reply to this post by Kristian Evers-2
On Thu, Nov 9, 2017 at 4:38 AM, Kristian Evers <[hidden email]> wrote:

> All,
>
>
>
> I think the current development cycle is coming to an end and a new release
> should be made. It’s been more than a year since that least release of
> PROJ.4. In that period of time the library has improved significantly, most
> notably by the introduction of a new and more consistent API, transformation
> pipelines and the cct 4D transformation CLI utility. The new additions have
> already seen a fair amount of testing and are now at a point where I believe
> they are stable enough to be released to the public. I would like to propose
> that we release the next version of PROJ.4 on December 15. This gives
> roughly a month to take care of the last few kinks that need to be ironed
> out. It also gives users of the library amble time to test the developing
> version in the setups and report any issues that have appeared since the
> last release. With a release mid-december we should aim for a release
> candidate in the start of December.
>
>
>
> I hope we all agree that the time has come to get a new release out there.
> Please voice your opinions on this matter.
>
>
>
> Howard, I guess you will be doing some/most of the heavy lifting with
> preparing the actual release, so please feel free to propose another time if
> this doesn’t fit your schedule.

I agree we need a release, but I think the window is too short and we
need a release candidate loop in there too. Let's have RC1 happen
December 15th, with the expectation that it would go final in January
or February as everyone catches up to testing it.

While we're on the topic, I must say the amount of work you and Thomas
have put into the library is incredible. The OSS Fuzz stuff along with
all of your other refactoring effort is going to give proj another
generation or two of life :)

When I was pushing back on the naming incrementing earlier, I hadn't
realized how much of an overhaul would take place. We're clearly in
"new major version" territory here, and I agree the effort deserves to
be called PROJ 5.0.0. This will also help with marketing the new
features as something distinct. It will give the laggards opportunity
to stick with their old version too.

If we were to do so, it would bring up some small issues:

* Rebranding in general (the website -> proj5.org, package names, etc)
* Backporting of OSS Fuzz issues to 4.9/4.10

Howard
_______________________________________________
Proj mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.maptools.org/mailman/listinfo/proj
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Time for a new release?

support-2
In reply to this post by Kristian Evers-2

Hello,


it seems to be very hard to understand that end users do not want to have updates or releases that have nothing new to give! It just adds work to them!


So, if there is nothing new in the library don't make any releases or updates! .. and if there would be some minor changes ... do not make a release unless many minor updates are gathered together!


Some applications like flash players, browsers, etc., make all the time updates that just keep the users getting more and more frustrated and angry! The usage of brain seems to be forbidden nowadays among young programmers .. or is the quality getting worse and worse?!


Janne.


---------------------------------------------



Kristian Evers kirjoitti 2017-11-09 12:38:

All,

 

I think the current development cycle is coming to an end and a new release should be made. It’s been more than a year since that least release of PROJ.4. In that period of time the library has improved significantly, most notably by the introduction of a new and more consistent API, transformation pipelines and the cct 4D transformation CLI utility. The new additions have already seen a fair amount of testing and are now at a point where I believe they are stable enough to be released to the public. I would like to propose that we release the next version of PROJ.4 on December 15. This gives roughly a month to take care of the last few kinks that need to be ironed out. It also gives users of the library amble time to test the developing version in the setups and report any issues that have appeared since the last release. With a release mid-december we should aim for a release candidate in the start of December.

 

I hope we all agree that the time has come to get a new release out there. Please voice your opinions on this matter.

 

Howard, I guess you will be doing some/most of the heavy lifting with preparing the actual release, so please feel free to propose another time if this doesn’t fit your schedule.

 

/Kristian


_______________________________________________
Proj mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.maptools.org/mailman/listinfo/proj


--
MNS Support
NNS Master Navigator Software
Copyright © Sapper Oy
www.mnspoint.com
[hidden email]

_______________________________________________
Proj mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.maptools.org/mailman/listinfo/proj
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Time for a new release?

Even Rouault-2

Janne,

 

Please stop your uninformed ranting. If you had followed, even by a tiny bit, the activity of the project over the last year, you'd have seen that a ton of great work has been done.

 

We have repeated for years that if you don't want new developements or bug fixes, stay with old versions. Or make your own fork: you're apparently much smarter and have more wisdom than the rest of us, poor brain-less folks.

 

But worse, you are,- and unfortunately this is not the first time -, publicly insulting qualified developers and scientists that are Kristian Evers and Thomas Knudsen. This is not acceptable, and we don't want to see this happening again.

 

Proj.4 as part of the MetaCRS initiative of OSGeo is subject to

http://www.osgeo.org/code_of_conduct

 

Read it carefully, and apply it. Thanks

 

Even

 

--

Spatialys - Geospatial professional services

http://www.spatialys.com


_______________________________________________
Proj mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.maptools.org/mailman/listinfo/proj
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Time for a new release?

Kristian Evers-2
In reply to this post by Howard Butler-3
RC1 December 15 is fine with me. Feature freeze between RC1 and final release?

Regarding re-branding I agree that we have to something. I still stand by my proposal a few months ago, but ultimately it's not a huge deal exactly how we do it. As long as it is clear to everyone that a major update is coming. Howard, are you proposing we change the name of the project to PROJ.5?

/Kristian

-----Oprindelig meddelelse-----
Fra: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] På vegne af Howard Butler
Sendt: 9. november 2017 15:51
Til: PROJ.4 and general Projections Discussions <[hidden email]>
Emne: Re: [Proj] Time for a new release?

On Thu, Nov 9, 2017 at 4:38 AM, Kristian Evers <[hidden email]> wrote:

> All,
>
>
>
> I think the current development cycle is coming to an end and a new release
> should be made. It’s been more than a year since that least release of
> PROJ.4. In that period of time the library has improved significantly, most
> notably by the introduction of a new and more consistent API, transformation
> pipelines and the cct 4D transformation CLI utility. The new additions have
> already seen a fair amount of testing and are now at a point where I believe
> they are stable enough to be released to the public. I would like to propose
> that we release the next version of PROJ.4 on December 15. This gives
> roughly a month to take care of the last few kinks that need to be ironed
> out. It also gives users of the library amble time to test the developing
> version in the setups and report any issues that have appeared since the
> last release. With a release mid-december we should aim for a release
> candidate in the start of December.
>
>
>
> I hope we all agree that the time has come to get a new release out there.
> Please voice your opinions on this matter.
>
>
>
> Howard, I guess you will be doing some/most of the heavy lifting with
> preparing the actual release, so please feel free to propose another time if
> this doesn’t fit your schedule.

I agree we need a release, but I think the window is too short and we
need a release candidate loop in there too. Let's have RC1 happen
December 15th, with the expectation that it would go final in January
or February as everyone catches up to testing it.

While we're on the topic, I must say the amount of work you and Thomas
have put into the library is incredible. The OSS Fuzz stuff along with
all of your other refactoring effort is going to give proj another
generation or two of life :)

When I was pushing back on the naming incrementing earlier, I hadn't
realized how much of an overhaul would take place. We're clearly in
"new major version" territory here, and I agree the effort deserves to
be called PROJ 5.0.0. This will also help with marketing the new
features as something distinct. It will give the laggards opportunity
to stick with their old version too.

If we were to do so, it would bring up some small issues:

* Rebranding in general (the website -> proj5.org, package names, etc)
* Backporting of OSS Fuzz issues to 4.9/4.10

Howard
_______________________________________________
Proj mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.maptools.org/mailman/listinfo/proj
_______________________________________________
Proj mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.maptools.org/mailman/listinfo/proj
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Time for a new release?

Even Rouault-2

On vendredi 10 novembre 2017 13:42:35 CET Kristian Evers wrote:

> RC1 December 15 is fine with me. Feature freeze between RC1 and final

> release?

 

Kristian,

 

Just from a terminology point of view, I'd say that a RC should be something that is thought to be in a releasable state, so with frozen interfaces and feature complete. Just bugfixes should normally go after the RC stage. Otherwise this is more a beta.

 

Even

 

--

Spatialys - Geospatial professional services

http://www.spatialys.com


_______________________________________________
Proj mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.maptools.org/mailman/listinfo/proj
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Time for a new release?

Huw James
In reply to this post by Even Rouault-2
Dear all,
I'd like to publicly thank Kristian, Thomas, Even and all others that have contributed to keeping PROJ.4 alive and well maintained.
Sometimes there are questions from very inexperienced users and sometimes by users who do not understand datums and projections very well. Such questions have been answered with great kindness and patience which is also to be admired.

Let's all of us remain kind and patient please.

Thank you all again. You're performing at a very standard in every way.

Huw James

On Fri, Nov 10, 2017 at 7:37 AM, Even Rouault <[hidden email]> wrote:

Janne,

 

Please stop your uninformed ranting. If you had followed, even by a tiny bit, the activity of the project over the last year, you'd have seen that a ton of great work has been done.

 

We have repeated for years that if you don't want new developements or bug fixes, stay with old versions. Or make your own fork: you're apparently much smarter and have more wisdom than the rest of us, poor brain-less folks.

 

But worse, you are,- and unfortunately this is not the first time -, publicly insulting qualified developers and scientists that are Kristian Evers and Thomas Knudsen. This is not acceptable, and we don't want to see this happening again.

 

Proj.4 as part of the MetaCRS initiative of OSGeo is subject to

http://www.osgeo.org/code_of_conduct

 

Read it carefully, and apply it. Thanks

 

Even

 

--

Spatialys - Geospatial professional services

http://www.spatialys.com


_______________________________________________
Proj mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.maptools.org/mailman/listinfo/proj


_______________________________________________
Proj mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.maptools.org/mailman/listinfo/proj
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Time for a new release?

Roger Oberholtzer-2
In reply to this post by Kristian Evers-2
On Thu, Nov 9, 2017 at 11:38 AM, Kristian Evers <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I think the current development cycle is coming to an end and a new release
> should be made.

Is there a good summary of the changes that have been made? Especially
of the library API?

--
Roger Oberholtzer
_______________________________________________
Proj mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.maptools.org/mailman/listinfo/proj
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Time for a new release?

Howard Butler-3
In reply to this post by Kristian Evers-2
On Fri, Nov 10, 2017 at 7:42 AM, Kristian Evers <[hidden email]> wrote:
> RC1 December 15 is fine with me. Feature freeze between RC1 and final release?

Feature freeze before RC1. Cut a beta now if you'd like. RC1 should be
intended for packagers to preflight the software through their
packaging systems and identify any significant issues that warrant a
new release.


>  Howard, are you proposing we change the name of the project to PROJ.5?

Let's go for it. I think the project's name is still PROJ, and this
will just be version 5 :)

More seriously, I think any distinction between PROJ.4/Proj.4 and PROJ
is moot at this point, and my objections to incrementing the major
version don't have much meaning. The geodetic support in the upcoming
PROJ.5 release will be quite compelling. We need a way to easily
market that as something new with the added forgiveness that a new
version number might cause users to afford us. It will also allow
people to stick with 4.x easily if they need to for whatever reason.

Also, congratulations again on the effort.

Howard
_______________________________________________
Proj mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.maptools.org/mailman/listinfo/proj
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Time for a new release?

Greg Troxel-2
In reply to this post by Kristian Evers-2

Kristian Evers <[hidden email]> writes:

> RC1 December 15 is fine with me. Feature freeze between RC1 and final
> release?

As a packager: of course.  Once you call something RC, it implies that
you only make changes which are fixing bugs that are regressions since
the last actual release.  So that's even stronger than feature freeze.

Some projects make lots of changes just before a release.  This leads to
problems on systems other than where the primary developers test.  So I
also think that any non-trivial change should lead to a new RC and
another week at least of waiting.

> Regarding re-branding I agree that we have to something. I still stand
> by my proposal a few months ago, but ultimately it's not a huge deal
> exactly how we do it. As long as it is clear to everyone that a major
> update is coming. Howard, are you proposing we change the name of the
> project to PROJ.5?

To me this is just churn, and makes people have to update all sorts of
things for no reason.  I prefer leaving the project name as is, and just
using  version numbers as apropriate.   I see nothing wrong with PROJ.4
version 5.0.

_______________________________________________
Proj mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.maptools.org/mailman/listinfo/proj

signature.asc (167 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Time for a new release?

Thomas Knudsen
In reply to this post by Roger Oberholtzer-2
Not exactly a summary, but Kristian is doing a huge effort to update docs. He has a preview version over at https://kbevers.github.io/index.html.

You could probably profitably start at https://kbevers.github.io/usage/transformation.html

There are some remarks about the thoughts behind the new API in the first lines of the new header file, proj.h - find it over at https://github.com/OSGeo/proj.4/blob/master/src/proj.h

Also, see the comments at the beginning of each function in proj_4D_api.c - https://github.com/OSGeo/proj.4/blob/master/src/proj_4D_api.c.

We have a lot of material around, that needs to be brushed up and fit together, but since the code has been in a state of flux, and the activity level high, it has been next to pointless to try to document in detail.

2017-11-10 15:38 GMT+01:00 Roger Oberholtzer <[hidden email]>:
On Thu, Nov 9, 2017 at 11:38 AM, Kristian Evers <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I think the current development cycle is coming to an end and a new release
> should be made.

Is there a good summary of the changes that have been made? Especially
of the library API?

--
Roger Oberholtzer
_______________________________________________
Proj mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.maptools.org/mailman/listinfo/proj


_______________________________________________
Proj mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.maptools.org/mailman/listinfo/proj
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Time for a new release?

Greg Troxel-2
In reply to this post by Roger Oberholtzer-2

Roger Oberholtzer <[hidden email]> writes:

> On Thu, Nov 9, 2017 at 11:38 AM, Kristian Evers <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> I think the current development cycle is coming to an end and a new release
>> should be made.
>
> Is there a good summary of the changes that have been made? Especially
> of the library API?

In general, a package should have a NEWS files that has a summary of
changes that users of the package should know, but omits bug fixes and
internal cleanups.  pkgsrc requires such a summary in update commit
messages, more or less what belongs in the GNU tradition NEWS file.

proj already has such a file, so it would be great to update that on
master for what will be the new release.

_______________________________________________
Proj mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.maptools.org/mailman/listinfo/proj

signature.asc (167 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Time for a new release?

Howard Butler-3
In reply to this post by Greg Troxel-2
On Fri, Nov 10, 2017 at 8:48 AM, Greg Troxel <[hidden email]> wrote:

> To me this is just churn, and makes people have to update all sorts of
> things for no reason.  I prefer leaving the project name as is, and just
> using  version numbers as apropriate.   I see nothing wrong with PROJ.4
> version 5.0.

I'm interested to hear other opinions, although I suppose version
numbering is the ultimate bike shedding exercise. I agree it's going
to cause churn, and that churn was my primary objection to
incrementing the name in the first place. That said, it seems
dissonant to me to call it PROJ.4 v 5.0.0.

Here are some facts about the next upcoming PROJ.5 release:

* A number of serious and sometimes silly warnings, overflows, and
bugs were found and fixed due to participation in the Google OSS Fuzz
project https://github.com/google/oss-fuzz
* Generalized geodetic transforms
* A "modern" API is now available (3rd attempt to create one over the
history of the project, I think?) to take advantage of the transforms,
streamline usage, and provide more safety
* Significant command line tool improvements

Kristian and Thomas' recent efforts are the first sustained
development activity that PROJ has had since Frank spent a bunch of
time in the codebase in the early 2000s. We should expect there will
be a few bumps.

Howard
_______________________________________________
Proj mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.maptools.org/mailman/listinfo/proj
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Time for a new release?

Kurt Schwehr-2
When I'm following point releases (Mac OSX fink), I prefer more frequent releases and smaller deltas.  That reduces the risks of breakages and gets fixes in sooner.  With more time between releases (and packager updates), we tend to get wedged for long periods of time.  I prefer not to see crazy version jump.  I prefer to see traditional API change based version bumps, but that's really hard to do as what is a break change can be surprising.

For most of my work, I've given up on point releases completely and am going with patch by patch.  I do have to combine a few patches sometimes to get to the next stable point, but it's super easy to do.  That means I can usually isolate a behavior change down to the smallest bit of code and work on handling that with my users.  And if there is a patch a user can't cope with, I can (usually) hold just that change back for a while and keep applying other patches for a while.  

I'm still working to catch up to head, but the switch has already been paying off massively.   I have a bunch of bugs that I haven't reported yet as I'm sure a large fraction of them were caught by OSS Fuzz and already fixed in Proj.4.

I've done the same for GEOS and GDAL.  Working patch by greatly reduced the stress involved in updating.  It's a lot easier to catch and manage behavior changes that impact my users.

You can see some of my biases in this talk by Titus... "C++ as a "Live at Head" Language" https://youtu.be/tISy7EJQPzI



On Fri, Nov 10, 2017 at 7:51 AM, Howard Butler <[hidden email]> wrote:
On Fri, Nov 10, 2017 at 8:48 AM, Greg Troxel <[hidden email]> wrote:

> To me this is just churn, and makes people have to update all sorts of
> things for no reason.  I prefer leaving the project name as is, and just
> using  version numbers as apropriate.   I see nothing wrong with PROJ.4
> version 5.0.

I'm interested to hear other opinions, although I suppose version
numbering is the ultimate bike shedding exercise. I agree it's going
to cause churn, and that churn was my primary objection to
incrementing the name in the first place. That said, it seems
dissonant to me to call it PROJ.4 v 5.0.0.

Here are some facts about the next upcoming PROJ.5 release:

* A number of serious and sometimes silly warnings, overflows, and
bugs were found and fixed due to participation in the Google OSS Fuzz
project https://github.com/google/oss-fuzz
* Generalized geodetic transforms
* A "modern" API is now available (3rd attempt to create one over the
history of the project, I think?) to take advantage of the transforms,
streamline usage, and provide more safety
* Significant command line tool improvements

Kristian and Thomas' recent efforts are the first sustained
development activity that PROJ has had since Frank spent a bunch of
time in the codebase in the early 2000s. We should expect there will
be a few bumps.

Howard
_______________________________________________
Proj mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.maptools.org/mailman/listinfo/proj



--

_______________________________________________
Proj mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.maptools.org/mailman/listinfo/proj
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Time for a new release?

Charles Karney
In reply to this post by Howard Butler-3
Yes and no on "PROJ.4 v 5.0.0".  I agree that it sounds contradictory.
However the name PROJ.4 is firmly baked into many places; e.g., PROJ4 is
the Cmake package name.  So I vote for "PROJ.4 v 5.0.0" since it signals
a major change and yet won't needless causes other things to break.

   --Charles

On 11/10/17 10:51, Howard Butler wrote:
> I'm interested to hear other opinions, although I suppose version
> numbering is the ultimate bike shedding exercise. I agree it's going
> to cause churn, and that churn was my primary objection to
> incrementing the name in the first place. That said, it seems
> dissonant to me to call it PROJ.4 v 5.0.0.
_______________________________________________
Proj mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.maptools.org/mailman/listinfo/proj
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Time for a new release?

Sebastiaan Couwenberg
In reply to this post by Howard Butler-3
On 11/10/2017 04:51 PM, Howard Butler wrote:

> On Fri, Nov 10, 2017 at 8:48 AM, Greg Troxel <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> To me this is just churn, and makes people have to update all sorts of
>> things for no reason.  I prefer leaving the project name as is, and just
>> using  version numbers as apropriate.   I see nothing wrong with PROJ.4
>> version 5.0.
>
> I'm interested to hear other opinions, although I suppose version
> numbering is the ultimate bike shedding exercise. I agree it's going
> to cause churn, and that churn was my primary objection to
> incrementing the name in the first place. That said, it seems
> dissonant to me to call it PROJ.4 v 5.0.0.

The new release is and major version bump is a good opportunity to
de-emphasize the "4" that crept into the naming. The project in Trac is
just called "proj", as is its package name in Debian, the name of this
mailinglist, etc.

Having the next release be PROJ v.5.0.0 is fine with me. Renaming a
bunch of stuff to PROJ.5 doesn't seem like the best option to me.
Removing the major version from the project name seems the like the
better option. Let the version number be just that again, instead of
part of the project name.

Kind Regards,

Bas

--
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1
_______________________________________________
Proj mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.maptools.org/mailman/listinfo/proj
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Time for a new release?

Markus Neteler

On Nov 10, 2017 7:29 PM, "Sebastiaan Couwenberg" <[hidden email]> wrote:
...
> The new release is and major version bump is a good opportunity to
> de-emphasize the "4" that crept into the naming. The project in Trac is
> just called "proj", as is its package name in Debian, the name of this
> mailinglist, etc.

Yes, this upcoming release is a good occasion to de-emphasize the "4".

> Having the next release be PROJ v.5.0.0 is fine with me.

Yes, like this the name will be separated from the version number and future-ready.

My few cents,
Markus


_______________________________________________
Proj mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.maptools.org/mailman/listinfo/proj
123