Re: [DebianGIS] Re: gdal
> Am I missing an alternative solution?
A separate solution (more like a hack) could be to rename the library to
qgis-gdal and package that together with qgis, however there are more
then likely more packages that are affected by an API change of gdal.
Just a dumb question:
But is there a sound reason for the C++ API to break? Why can't it be
backwards compatible (as I understand is the C-API)? I fully
understand that this potentially creates unsolvable development
It sounds somewhat strange to offer a changed C++API to a library
without changing the library major version number.
Especially considering Franks statement:
> The C++ API is the "real" API. The C API is a set of cover functions.
Or am I now missing something?
IMVeryHO breaking an API needs some consideration on who it might
affect and if it might be avoided if at all possible. Making an API
available does give users hope and expectations on using the library.
So <perhaps> a better solution: create/keep a backwards compatible
C++-API, and/or keep that API as compatible as possible and updating
the lib version when it is not.
Which was my 2 cents....