On 1 October 2017 at 20:47, Sandro Santilli <s...@kbt.io> wrote: > On Sat, Sep 30, 2017 at 09:26:42PM +0200, Mateusz Loskot wrote: >> /topic changed >> /cc geos-devel >> >> On 30 September 2017 at 20:47, Greg Troxel <g...@lexort.com> wrote: > >> > ### Using the C++ interface (discouraged) >> > >> > NB: The C++ interface should not be used directly; the GEOS project >> > views it as a bug for another program to use the C++ interface or even >> > to directly link against the C++ library. >> > [...] > >> > Mateusz Loskot <mate...@loskot.net> writes: >> >> Moreover, this paragraph has no rights to be there or in any official >> GEOS writing. >> I'm very surprised Sandro allowed it in - I assume a merge in rush. > > Maybe "a bug" is too much, but the "discouraged" label is important. > We don't want client software to use the C++ API,
So, we decide for clients? Clients are warned, we don't care what API they decide to use. > and you see the reason today (GEOS is kept back in Debian because a client > used the > C++ API). So what? It's still ac client's authors freedom to decide. If they use the C++ API despite the no stability promise policy, and they packaged it for a distro, perhaps authors of the software should not be doing what they are doing if they don't care about reading the basic info about the library they use. >> Finally, even if GEOS C++ API was/is marked as deprecated, then I ask >> where is the RFC, where is the PSC voting the motion, >> where is the public announcement? > > Idea was announced here: > https://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/geos-devel/2005-April/001375.html > > Work was announced here: > https://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/geos-devel/2005-September/001574.html > > First release and recommendation to avoid C++ API was here: > https://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/geos-devel/2005-November/001619.html Those are not related to this particular discussion. Those are about developing the C API, but its introduction had not deprecated anything. It just made life of developers easier. > I'm not aware of any motion to explicitly mark C++ API as "deprecated" > but as it's effectively not maintained, it is continuosly "deprecated". The C++ API is maintained, but every new release introduces new C++ API and saying it is becoming deprecated is incorrect. Unless, Sandro, your aim is to eventually mark C++ API deprecated and stop installing C++ API libraries and headers. That will require RFC and that is what I'm debating about. Best regards, -- Mateusz Loskot, http://mateusz.loskot.net _______________________________________________ geos-devel mailing list geos-devel@lists.osgeo.org https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geos-devel