ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Simeon H.K. Fitch" <sim...@fitch.net>
Subject Re: License problem
Date Tue, 02 Jan 2001 18:51:42 GMT
On Tue, Jan 02, 2001 at 03:40:50PM +0000, Stephane Bailliez wrote:
> 
> I don't like the idea of being so tighted to a specific implementation
> (especially a xml parser) but AFAIK this feature unfortunately does not
> exist in other parsers (except with the DOM L2 importNode), and I didn't
> feel like cloning all elements of the tree right now (this is prototype
> after all, no need to reinvent the wheel :-).
> 
> Once this is validated I would prefer to remains parser independant and add
> additional code, at least it will avoid parser transition problem, and plus
> performance should not be an issue.
> 
> > From: Conor MacNeill [mailto:conor@cognet.com.au]
> > 
> > Sure, I didn't consider antidote as I don't use the GUI, at 
> > least not yet.
> > Not that keen on tying the GUI or JUnit to a particular XML 
> > parser either.
> > 

Antidote's implementation specific dependence on the Sun implementaion
is temporary. It's a quick hack to get the parsing behavior I want
while we are all waiting to see what Ant 2.0 ends up looking like. I
don't want to waste time on parsing support until I see if I'm going
to have to mirror the data model or not. 

Regardless, I don't recommend bundling Antidote in any installation
package as it's not ready for prime-time. That being the case, if the
ant core works with xerces, then I'd publish that compatibility.

sim

-- 
Mustard Seed Software
mailto:simeon@fitch.net

Mime
View raw message