Re: [xml] Some tarball questions

[Mike Hommey <mh glandium org>]

Daniel Veillard wrote:
[...]
> To be 100% clear to me the current state is:
>   You complain "it's not needed", I'm saying "it is needed" and asking 
>   "where is the problem ?"

I'm just assuming it might not be needed and asking for enlightenment. 
Maybe my bad english led you to think I'm toughly complaining, though 
(Yes, even if my name does sound english or assimilated, I'm not english 
native)
Anyway, now I know you need it. But a question remains : why is the 
distributed file different from the one actually generated during the 
build ?

> I have good practical reasons for the current state and so far you're
> complaining but without telling how this break something nor why this
> might break. The status-quo will remain unless you justify the
> problem.

It's just a matter of constitency. Why a distributed file from a 
particular version is different from the generated file by the same 
version ?
Basically, I'm expecting to have the same data in my tree after 
untarring the tarball and after running the commands :
./configure (with any options)
make
make install
make distclean

At the moment, this is not the case. It might not be annoying for you, 
it might not be annoying for anybody else, but it is a bit annoying for 
me, and could lead to more important consistency issues in the future.

I'm not saying that you MUST ABSOLUTLY change that ; I'm just saying it 
would be better, IMHO, to maintain consistency, and, as a side effect, 
would prevent me to workaround those inconsistencies in my packaging.
I can investigate more deeply on the case and provide patches for more 
consistency while not removing the file...

Mike