> I want to raise same concerns that David did in a thread a few
> months ago.
>
> I don't think a logging library is neither needed nor appropriate
> for FreeType. Werner, can you please summarize why you think this
> is a good idea?
See
https://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/freetype-devel/2020-05/msg00148.html
for example.
It's not clear to me why there is so much concern. The logging
library stuff will stay optional as a debugging aid and not be part of
the default production version of FreeType. How could better logging
capabilities ever be a bad thing?
The logic just doesn't fly.
Logging libraries are used for collecting and filtering and storing logs *in production systems*. What you seem to want is better debugging facilities. That's it.
You seem to be on the camp of "how can more stuff be a bad idea." More stuff *is* bad if those stuff don't serve a real purpose. Maintenance cost increase is real. Bloat is real. Complexity is real. FreeType needs *less* stuff, not *more*. Same about adding metafont stuff in. Same about how otvalid and gxvalid went in. It's pile of unused untested unneeded crap.
FreeType needs to change focus. And I trust David to know what he's doing. And you are not listening to him either.