On Sunday 22 February 2004 01:36 pm, Sterling Hughes wrote: > > Mmmh > > > > too bad, will try to find a solution for libxml2 < 2.6 > > > > I know, it's late in the release process, but the "old" implementation > > didn't recognise default namespaces, which broke quite some ext/xml > > scripts from php4 days and I'd like to have fixed that before 5.0.0 > > In the meantime either add #ifdef configure checks or revert it out. > Recognizing default namespaces shouldn't be hard to hack in to the code > that was there, it just requires a bit of a rethink, and I believe we're > set on supporting libxml2.5, right?
I personally would like to keep support for libxml 2.5, just because we know it works correctly and stable with the xml extensions and I for one have had little time to extensively test the xml extensions against 2.6.x. Other than that, I have no other reasons for supporting 2.5 However, I believe the namespace support for SAX wasn't introduced or at least wasn't fixed up until 2.6 so the issue may not be able to be fixed without requiring 2.6 That being said, if everyone really wants to require 2.6 I would be fine with it, but we may possibly be introducing new problems and will not be able to fall back to 2.5. From what I have heard from people running 2.6.x have reported, there have been no problems so far, but not sure how heavily they tested everything. Rob -- PHP CVS Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
