Re: libxml bundling
| From: | Zeev Suraski | Date: | Sat, 01 Jun 2002 01:10:23 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: libxml bundling | ||
| References: | 1 | Groups: | php.dev |
| Request: | Send a blank email to php-dev+get-84649@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
Guys,
Unless somebody strongly objects, I suggest we drop the discussion about how horrible it would be to import libxml2 into our CVS. I believe it's well established that it's a Bad Thing to do, there's no point hashing it.
I believe the question on the table is whether libxml2 is important enough from an end-user's point of view to be built into PHP. If we decide that the answer to that is positive, then there's a fairly easy way of doing that. My personal opinion is that XML today is as basic and important as ASCII, so bundling libxml makes good sense.
I believe that bundling at the makedist level makes the most sense, because:
(a) Synchronization is trivial
(b) We get to choose what libxml we use, so our libxml-dependent code doesn't have to support the zillion different libxml's out there (the moving target argument, in my opinion, is a good reason for us to bundle a stable version of libxml rather than support all versions out there)
We need to address the symbol clash issue, and that's about it.
Zeev