- Contributions to Proj4J certainly don't *have* to be
ported back to Proj4.
- However, if it is a fix to something essential (like
projection mathematics) then I assume the Proj4 project
would welcome an issue raised, or even a PR if that's
available. (Given the language difference I would assume
that contributing actual code would be unlikely however?)
- In general "Java design changes" sound like things that
can't be ported back anyway. But if there is something that
would affect Proj4 design, then possibly a well-thought out
issue suggestion would be welcomed. But that seems unlikely,
since Proj4 has become quite a bit more complex in recent
releases, and so is probably way out ahead of Proj4J
- Generally I'd say Proj4J should just track Proj4. As
per previous remark, that may be becoming more difficult.
Hopefully the core projection mathematics at least can be
tracked. Divergence there would be BAD, I think. Ideally
identical coordinate systems should produce the same result
in both libraries.
Martin
---------- Forwarded
message ---------
From:
Jim
Hughes <jhughes@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, Sep 13, 2019 at 10:58 AM
Subject: Fwd: [proj4j-dev] Contributing to Proj4J &
impact on Proj4
To: Martin Davis <
mtnclimb@xxxxxxxxx>
Hi Martin,
Are you on this list? I'm wondering who has the
final say on Proj4j...
Thoughts on Nick's question?
Cheers,
Jim
--------
Forwarded Message --------
General question to the group. I
understand Proj4J is / was largely a port of proj4.
Do contributions to Proj4J have to be cross ported
to Proj4 to avoid the two becoming fragmented? Or is
it on a case by case basis? (e.g. changes to
transforms and other core mathematics have to be
cross ported but Java design changes do not)
Thanks in advance.