On 5/17/19 1:14 PM, Andrew Bell wrote: > Why is this? There are many libraries that have C++ interfaces.
Which also have difficulty providing a stable ABI. One that doesn't change the symbols it exports with the new compiler releases, etc. Having a stable C ABI is a major plus for any project that uses C++ in its codebase, it makes transitions to new releases much easier. A core library like GEOS have many projects that require it, some are actively maintained and implement changes quicky, others don't. And these make life suck for distributions where all the projects need to be integrated to work with the same version of GEOS. > On Thu, May 16, 2019, 11:37 PM Sebastiaan Couwenberg <sebas...@xs4all.nl> > wrote: > >> On 5/16/19 11:28 PM, Mateusz Loskot wrote: >>> I'd like propose to effectively revert the RFC 6: >>> >>> https://trac.osgeo.org/geos/wiki/RFC9 >> >> Please don't. We'll get more projects like OSSIM that break with new >> GEOS releases, this causes significant delays before the new release can >> be included in distributions where lots of projects depend on GEOS >> (which all need to build with the new release). Kind Regards, Bas -- GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1 Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146 50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1 _______________________________________________ geos-devel mailing list geos-devel@lists.osgeo.org https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geos-devel
