Hey,

After looking a little bit at the issue, it seems that xerces-p could
be handled as an option for configure --with-perl or --with-swig or
something, and that would enable having a swig-free distribution by
*default*.

But it seems that it really is a question of where does the xerces-p
codebase belong? As Boris said, it is odd for many people to have the
swig and Perl code in the main codebase. I can perceive, that it will
also complicate matters for me to create the Xerces-P distribution,
Perl can handle it better if the xerces-c source code is a
subdirectory of the Perl code and not the other way around.

So I can see only one reason to keep Xerces-P in the main codebase,
and that is the make test-suite target. It was my hope that the test
suite would prove useful to the Xerces-C developers. Since the swig
directory hasn't worked for some time, it's been impossible to test.
Boris indicated that it wouldn't be an obvious help for him. So
unless, it is a help, I think Xerces-P would be best out of the main
codebase.

Shall I move the code back into the Xerces-P repository again and out
of Xerces-C?

I suspect there will have to be some reassurance to the ASF board that
Xerces-P is getting enough oversight, but then it will remove any
feeling of burden on the Xerces-C maintainers.

Cheers, jas.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to