Re: [xml] Which interfaces should be put into LSB?

[Daniel Veillard <veillard redhat com>]

On Thu, Nov 17, 2005 at 08:21:17AM -0800, Hisashi T Fujinaka wrote:
> It's an added level of abstraction for the benefit of standardization
> across distros. We're trying to include the smallest subset of the
> header information that would be useful to an applications developer. I

  You would first have to define what that application does. You will have
pain with this I'm afraid, because suddenly any problem with those headers
are not problems with libxml2 headers and will have to be dealt by LSB,
not by this community. This is forking a subset, with all priviledges and
duties associated with it.

> > > each other. Is there a subset of header files that an application would
> > > use so I can just concentrate on those?
> >
> > See the previous discussion about this, I have the feeling that we are 
> > just
> > starting over from scratch:
> >  http://mail.gnome.org/archives/xml/2005-September/msg00157.html
>
> I guess I missed that message. I thought I saw all the discussions
> between you and Nilesh, but don't remember this.

  yes this was done really at the beginning of the discussion.

Daniel

-- 
Daniel Veillard      | Red Hat http://redhat.com/
veillard redhat com  | libxml GNOME XML XSLT toolkit  http://xmlsoft.org/
http://veillard.com/ | Rpmfind RPM search engine http://rpmfind.net/