[geos-devel] RFC6 - Discourage use of C++ API by requiring a configure switch to install the c++ headers and SDK

Regina Obe lr at pcorp.us
Tue Oct 3 22:08:37 PDT 2017



Thanks. Yes I missed this note.  I've revised the subject line above to make it clear what my proposal was changed to after input from you and Kurt.


The new proposal - https://trac.osgeo.org/geos/wiki/RFC6  is to keep the C++ API but require people building to have a –with-cplusplus-sdk-install to enable it.


So far we have the following PSC Votes


Dale +1

Regina + 1

Hobu -1

Paul Ramsey hasn't voted

Sandro Santilli hasn't voted


Mat gave his -1 but he doesn't count cause he's not on the PSC :)

But I do see that Mat updated the ReadMe  -- thanks Mat -  https://git.osgeo.org/gogs/geos/geos/commit/18ad844411880b3b15507ff21c7a452ab8694cc2 


I should add now that osm2pgsql and osmium are leaving the GEOS camp and it is my understanding 

they were the only widely used projects using the GEOS C++ API now is a perfect time to make this motion

before any future projects start relying on the C++ API without reading the fine print and get widely adopted.


I do not trust people to read fine print, cause hell I don't until something doesn't work and I assume everyone is like me :)


If in the future we can find a way to provide the same stability promise for C++ API as we do for C API then I'm all for allowing the C++ API to be by default available without requiring any extra configure.


According to RFC1 – it says the motion can not pass    https://trac.osgeo.org/geos/wiki/RFC1  with a -1 and I have to give Hobu a chance to debate his point :)


"Respondents may vote "-1" to veto a proposal, but must provide clear reasoning and alternate approaches to resolving the problem within the two days."


So I'd like to hear Hobu's alternative suggestions.








From: geos-devel [mailto:geos-devel-bounces at lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Dale Lutz
Sent: Tuesday, October 03, 2017 11:17 PM
To: GEOS Development List <geos-devel at lists.osgeo.org>
Subject: Re: [geos-devel] RFC6 - Drop GEOS C++ API at GEOS 3.8


I see that the issue has now dropped and I apologize if it was because I mis-addressed my note below from earlier today.

But, just for the record, I want it to be known that we're cool with whatever decision is taken.  So my attempt at an earlier response is pasted below.



---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Dale Lutz <dale.lutz at safe.com <mailto:dale.lutz at safe.com> >
Date: Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 1:40 PM
Subject: Re: [postgis-devel] RFC6 - Drop GEOS C++ API at GEOS 3.8
To: <geos-devel-request at lists.osgeo.org <mailto:geos-devel-request at lists.osgeo.org> >


The team here has advised looked over the situation and the constraints (as others have written in this list), and concluded that the proposal at  <https://trac.osgeo.org/geos/wiki/RFC6> https://trac.osgeo.org/geos/wiki/RFC6 seems reasonable.  The C++ headers become clearly "internal use only" but still available for sufficiently adventurous souls (such as we self-define as).


So +1 from us.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/geos-devel/attachments/20171004/4d3d27cd/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the geos-devel mailing list