[gdal-dev] Documenting build requirements (e.g. ODBC)

[Mateusz Loskot]

On Sun, 20 Oct 2019 at 19:31, Jeff McKenna
<jmckenna at gatewaygeomatics.com> wrote:
> > On lundi 30 septembre 2019 11:21:16 CEST Mateusz Loskot wrote:
> >>
> >> I'm a bit lost where build requirements are supposed
> >> to be documented now. They used to be described
> >> on the Wiki, e.g. https://trac.osgeo.org/gdal/wiki/BuildingOnUnix
> >> or driver-specific ones https://trac.osgeo.org/gdal/wiki/ECW
> >
>
> The wiki worked really well for that, and over the years we compiled
> quite a list of build steps for drivers and platforms
> (https://trac.osgeo.org/gdal/wiki/BuildHints).  I'd suggest we continue
> to use the wiki method (meaning now we transition to the Github wiki),
> so we don't have any funnels where someone needs to approve or
> disapprove of a change to the official website or repository.

I don't have anything against the wiki but a wiki is supposed to be
complementary to existing docs.

Even suggested to recover the "Compiled by default" column
from the table in the old docs. On reflection, I don't think that
will solve problem I'm calling in this thread - what are the build
requirements of GDAL and features in GDAL.

IMO, there should be

https://gdal.org/building/
https://gdal.org/building/requirements
https://gdal.org/building/unix
https://gdal.org/building/windows

where https://gdal.org/building/requirements  lists common dependencies
similarly to https://pdal.io/development/compilation/dependencies.html

e.g. it lists ODBC and describes briefly that it is required by drivers A, B, C,
that on Unix one can use unixODBC or iODBC; that on Windows it comes
with native Windows SDK.
Similarly for libcurl, proj, and any other general purpose dependency of GDAL.

> The argument sometimes used against a wiki is that it is not managed,
> but this is exactly why the Buildhints wiki was allowed to thrive.

Official build procedure with requirements listed is  one thing.
Build hints, workarounds and troubleshooting is a different thing.
IMO, the former should be reviewed, curated and up to date
while the latter is a perfect fit for community-written wiki
that can rot...

> There of course will still be one hurdle, requiring to have a Github
> account, but besides that the wiki should thrive there for years to come.

Similar hurdle (requirement of an account) applies to OSGeo infrastructure.

Best regards,
--
Mateusz Loskot, http://mateusz.loskot.net