> On Feb 18, 2022, at 4:31 PM, Paul Ramsey wrote:
>
>
>> On Feb 18, 2022, at 4:15 PM, Andrew Bell wrote:
>>
>> Has the attitude about keeping the codebase in sync with the JTS code
>> changed? I would potentially do some work on this project if this isn't a
>> requirement -- it seemed
> On Feb 18, 2022, at 4:15 PM, Andrew Bell wrote:
>
> Has the attitude about keeping the codebase in sync with the JTS code
> changed? I would potentially do some work on this project if this isn't a
> requirement -- it seemed difficult to make changes that would make the code
> more
Has the attitude about keeping the codebase in sync with the JTS code
changed? I would potentially do some work on this project if this isn't a
requirement -- it seemed difficult to make changes that would make the code
more accessible with strict adherence to the JTS structure.
Sorry if this
While I appreciate the sentiment behind this, I do not believe the particular
breakdown below is reflective of the current needs of this project.
- This is a library. The users of the project are not pro-sumers or
non-technical, they are C and C++ developers. Users who are not C and C++
Thanks Dale, for your time with the PSC over the years and for Safe's early
support and validation of GEOS as a library that could to "real work for real
people" back when that was, curiously, an argument that had to be made!
Yours,
Paul
> On Feb 17, 2022, at 5:48 PM, Dale Lutz wrote:
>
>
