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

["Banginwar, Rajesh" <rajesh banginwar intel com>]

Hi Daniel,      
        If all of these headers are meant to be used by application
developers, does libXML2 community basically guarantees that these
headers will remain functionally similar across versions of libxml2
library? Basically the applications should not find additional issues
due to changes done to the headers through reorganization etc. (or
removal of some headers completely without deprecating or removing the
interfaces etc from it). 

As mentioned below, GTK community does not guarantee the presence of all
the headers except for the top level one. Just wanted to make sure
before we finalize the LSB build environment structure. 

Thanks,

-Rajesh

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Daniel Veillard [mailto:veillard redhat com]
> Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2005 1:35 PM
> To: Banginwar, Rajesh
> Cc: Hisashi T Fujinaka; xml gnome org
> Subject: Re: [xml] Which interfaces should be put into LSB?
>
> 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/