[gdal-dev] Call for review and discussion on RFC96: Deferred in-tree C++ plugin loading

[Kurt Schwehr]

Thanks Even for the RFC!

After a quick read, this seems reasonable. I was mostly concerned about the
impact on folks who statically build everything (my biggest use case), but
that is completely addressed in the doc.

On Thu, Nov 2, 2023 at 5:00 AM Even Rouault via gdal-dev <
gdal-dev at lists.osgeo.org> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I'm seeking for feedback and review on a new RFC (RFC 96: Deferred
> in-tree C++ plugin loading),
> detailed in https://github.com/OSGeo/gdal/pull/8648, whose summary is:
>
> This RFC adds a mechanism to defer the loading of in-tree C++ plugin
> drivers to
> the point where their executable code is actually needed, and converts a
> number
> of relevant drivers to use that mechanism. The aim is to allow for more
> modular
> GDAL builds, while improving the performance of plugin loading.
>
> (This is material only for GDAL 3.9 of course)
>
> Even
>
> --
> http://www.spatialys.com
> My software is free, but my time generally not.
>
> _______________________________________________
> gdal-dev mailing list
> gdal-dev at lists.osgeo.org
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/gdal-dev/attachments/20231102/7e921009/attachment.htm>