Re: dtd for package.xml-files

I'd like to see at the very least subpackages in there, and possibly the publicweb role. There have been no solid oppositions to publicweb, and I think people like subpackages now too, although it's hard to tell :). This would involve adding the allowed dependency type "spkg" and file role "publicweb" or whatever people want to call it. Greg Stefan Neufeind wrote:

Sorry if I missed something on the list - but I think I didn't :-) Tomas, what's the latest news about your dtd for package.xml-files? Was there a final release? Would you mark the filelist as being optional (for the changelog which doesn't really need to list all files in all releases)? And if we come to a final package.xml-format maybe this could be announced on the list so people could start at least hand-checking their package.xml against the dtd or also check other people's package.xml in CVS against the dtd and build diff's for the next releases of packages. Stefan