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@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@lists.osgeo.org > https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev >
_______________________________________________ gdal-dev mailing list gdal-dev@lists.osgeo.org https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev
