Dynamic libmap.so

[Howard Butler]

At 11:28 AM 5/18/2006, Tamas Szekeres wrote:
>Howard,
>
>I prefer retaining both of the two options enabling the user to select
>the preferred deployment model. It's true that the default option
>differs for the UNIX and the Windows builds, but i havent found any
>problematic issue related to this.

Ah, I didn't want to suggest *only* building the dynamic variant.  I 
agree we should continue to do both.  I was wondering why we also 
didn't build the dynamic one too.  I assumed it was for historical 
reasons, and I was wondering if those reasons gone.

>However we should equalize the way how the various data providers /
>output format providers communicate with the mapserver core and
>minimize the dependency from each other. Furthermore we should
>consider to enable the option for the providers being linked
>dinamically to mapserver.
>
>What is the current state of the C API you have mentioned. Do we have
>ideas or concepts?
>(Maybe I have missed something)

I'm not sure there is a current state other than a desire by many to 
have one.  Anyone?

Howard