[geos-devel] RFC 9: Restore C++ API as public API

[Regina Obe]

Mat,

I think you misunderstood me a little

> The first and third statements in the second paragraph of your response is false. 
> I have ever asked to "guarantee a stable C++ API at this point in time" or at any point ever.
> It's a fact.
> [Regina Obe] 

I never said you wanted to guarantee a stable C++ API.  And we don't have one is my point.
Something that is unstable should not be shared.  It should be statically linked or set aside for your own project and as such you shouldn't expect package maintainers to carry your project.  


> The second statement in the second paragraph of your response is also false.
> GEOS users can and do depend on the C++ API.
> It's a fact. 
No disagreement there - just don't want packagers burdened with having to ship these projects and right now we have few if any that use the C++ API
that packagers need to ship.  I'd like to keep it that way by discouraging sharing of the C++ API.  Installing headers etc -- as pramsey suggested would just open up the flood-gates of C++ projects relying on the C++-API until we have some REALLY IMPORTANT C++ project that relies on GEOS that packagers would like to ship, and expecting them to statically link every GEOS use is insane and a security hole.

I care more about packagers feeling comfortable about shipping a newer GEOS C-API and PostGIS being able to use a newer GEOS C-API than I feel about making C++ developers happy. You people have all proven to be only concerned about your self-interest and your toys.


> The arguments you present show to me you're pursuing goals of a package manager but not a programmer who wrote that code.

The way I see it Mat -- there are way more programmers than there are packagers on the GEOS / PostGIS teams, so YES I got to look out for the minority which has a major impact on the majority, because clearly no one else seems to.

> This brought incompatible toys in to the common sandbox.
What incompatible toys -- you still have your sandbox -- it's just a little more sandboxed.

> You do not want to recognize it.
I recognize it but I care much less about it than other things.  You're the one that turned in your keys to the GEOS project and said you didn't want to be part of it anymore.  I was extremely disappointed when you said that. So why this sudden new found interest?
 
> I'm not going to keep convincing you anymore.
Good cause we are in full agreement - we are just on opposite sides of the spectrum.

Thanks,
Regina