Re: [xml] Re: [xslt] libxml3 (C++ Wrappers, Performance Paranoia)

My 2 cents: I am not sure I clear understand the need for the libxml3.
I already said that I would like to have more consistent API but for me
it is not enough to create a new version. However, I may be wrong and
I miss something important. I think that the first step should be preparing
a written down proposal that will give more details on the libxml3 goals, new features
and the changes from libxml2 in general.


Daniel Veillard wrote:


I clearly can't keep-up with all development wishes, Peter would you
like to drive this effort ? This would include the following steps:
  - make a new module in Gnome CVS called libxml3
  - give you (or another maintainer) commit rights on it
  - start hacking on that tree
  - integrate patches from the libxml2 branch
As the IETF motto I believe in "rought consensus and running code",
and I don't see how I could at the moment maintain running code, I think
there is at least a few individual on this list ready to work on it, and
I can't act as the coordinator, so to avoid loosing time I suggest to
get the resources needed fork now and don't wait for me.
Among the things to look at in libxml3 is the API for a shared access of
the private field of nodes,

So Peter do you want to drive this, or otherwise is there any volunteer ?


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]