Re: Bundling libxml2 default?
| From: | (Marcus Börger) | Date: | Sat, 17 May 2003 00:24:31 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: Bundling libxml2 default? | ||
| References: | 1 2 3 4 | Groups: | php.internals |
| Request: | Send a blank email to internals+get-1625@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
At 20:48 16.05.2003, Derick Rethans wrote:
On Fri, 16 May 2003, Adam Dickmeiss wrote: I still have not seen any good reason to bundle. You state at http://edwardbear.org/blog/ that libxml2 is bundled because expat is bundled. Is that the best argument? You want people to switch to a more "modern" interface. The new interface apparently breaks BC in multiple ways (that's not your fault, the tools are just different). How about unbundling expat and let people choose with configure what of those libs they want to use. That solution will both make configure for PHP easier to use _and_ save you from updating the bundled software (for security updates, for example).The whole point is we must unbundle expat first because not doing that would make it hard to develop good xml support for PHP. Simply because the developers would use the bundled lib instead of the more sophisticaated external one. And that would result in keeping PHP a poor language compared to other scripting languages.
I agree 100% (and if I'm not mistaken Sterling does too).I talked with Sterling too and i guess Dericks is right. And after reading the above you may at least understand my problems with expat/libxml. marcus