Hi James, James Berry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 02/11/2005 03:11:26 PM:
> Is there any more discussion on this topic? Are we ready to go to a > vote that we move forward on this direction/proposal? > > Recommended sequence: > > - A vote to ensure that we're in favor of moving toward a 3.0 > release. > > (on approval): > > - Move repository to subversion +1. Thanks to everyone who's helped to allay my fears. > - Branch off a 2.x branch > - Actively pursue a next 2.x release if it's deemed needed (???) > - Begin work on a 3.x on repository HEAD > - Develop 3.0 feature set feature rough outline, schedule, and > responsibilities The only change here that I'd suggest is that it might be good to get a feeling as to who actually wants to work on features, and is willing to commit the time to see them through, before we formally decide to move to 3.0. There is clear interest in modernizing the build system (and I'm +1 on that, BTW), and it doesn't sound like there will be any shortage of people to help get the work done. That, in itself, wouldn't seem to necessitate a 3.0. Guess what I'm suggesting is that we might want to have an idea about what the next release will contain before we decide what to call it. If we have an XInclude volunteer, for instance, it's probable the effort could be accomodated without a breaking change. Note that the above doesn't mean I'm not in favour of a 3.0. It'd just be odd if we voted for a 3.0, forked the codebase, then discovered the itch didn't match the will to scratch. :) > On Feb 10, 2005, at 8:33 AM, James Berry wrote: > > > To summarize what I've heard/said so far: > > Potential feature additions/fixes for 3.0: > > - Reorganization of public/private includes > > - Revisiting of install locations > > - Refactoring of x-platform support > > - A true autoconf-based build infrastructure > > - Add a libcurl based netaccessor? > > - Add DOM 3.0 support? > > Potential feature/interface deletions: > > - Remove deprecated DOM altogether. > > - Remove and/or update deprecated enums > > - Remove non-thread-safe psvi methods. > > - Remove Mac OS Classic support (supporting Mac OS X only for 3.0). > > Anything else bold that needs to be done? Integral xpath support > > anyone? Lots of cool ideas there. I'm with Alby though in being reticent about drawing in STL-based code at this juncture. I could be wrong about this, but I seem to recall something about Xalan-C having relatively recently gone through a painful change away from STL for the sake of portability. Cheers! Neil Neil Graham Manager, XML Parser Development IBM Toronto Lab Phone: 905-413-3519, T/L 969-3519 E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
