I’mma refrain from answering there, because I’m one of the “complainers” and too negative, but I would honestly recommend this guy steer very clear of Xojo, if he wants to do this kind thing.
Using Xojo, each executable can take 40 mb of disk space. Once he adds plugins and everything, he’s gonna make that half a gb app look tiny.
If he wants to do that, he’d be way better off using platform native tools, where he get executables at low as 1 or 2 MB.
A single app with multiple helper call compiled with th same version of Xojo can share one set of libs, plugin dylibs, etc
Its still not super trim but this can trim a lot of duplication out
I started making command line apps out of regular apps, just so I could this. The trouble was, I’d forget to re-compile 'em all and that lead to crashes.
I really really really like how Xcode handles helpers, you build 'em in the same project and let Xcode manage it. Ironically, you don’t need libs and frameworks 
Absolutely
If a person relies on this interdependency then when packaging things up you’d seriously want to make sure, somehow, everything had been recompiled
Its a pain but it can be done
That WOULD be nice for Xojo too
A single project that had multiple targets - and so many other things
MacOS already ships them all so it would only be extra frameworks and additions like that you’d ever need to include in the app bundle
In Xojo’s case those are the code that bridge from Xojo to OS functions
Would be nice if they could/would break them up to make it possible to strip more granularly but they seem to be adding accidental dependencies like PDF and Charts
With Xojo’s Declares, they could do away with their frameworks altogether.
Not entirely
But yes they could probably trim them down a lot