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

[Daniel Veillard <veillard redhat com>]

On Thu, Nov 17, 2005 at 10:28:28AM -0800, Banginwar, Rajesh wrote:
> Hi Daniel,
>       A clarification is I think needed here.
>
> Historically LSB has been producing headers for application developers
> to use. These headers do not include all the interfaces/symbols not part
> of LSB (deprecated, experimental etc. as you helped us identify in the
> past). The question really is not about interfaces (as that problem is
> mostly resolved; so no restart of discussion etc.). Question is around
> what headers should an application really use. Let me give an example
> here. For GTK libraries there are more than 100 headers supplied by
> upstream but only handful (the top level ones) are really meant to be
> used by application developers. So what LSB does, is supply only those
> headers in its build environment. These headers is what apps will/should
> be using anyway as upstream does not guarantee the names and contents of
> others will remain same.

  okay

> Is that the case for libxml2? Or all the 40 or so headers supplied are
> meant for application developers?

  yes, right, just don't add the deprecated ones, like SAX.h DOCBparser.h
or those whose API you don't want to see used.

> If so, LSB build environment will
> provide all those headers minus the ones for non-LSB interfaces. These
> headers typically are similar (or same in many cases) to what upstream
> provides.

  Okay,

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/