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

[Howard Butler]

> On Nov 2, 2023, at 6:59 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)

😍😍😍
IMO this has been needed for a while. I'm glad you've been able to come to a solution that doesn't significantly impact behavior or performance. 

I would like to see some language that describes the expectations for version compatibility of plugins (ie, what happens with a plugin built against x.0 is used against a main library of y.0).

I'm very interested to hear from packagers about this topic and whether or not a plugin model like this is desirable to address GDAL's large dependency challenge.

Howard
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/gdal-dev/attachments/20231102/0b12361e/attachment.htm>