apr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Davi Arnaut <d...@haxent.com.br>
Subject Re: Get rid of builtin expat
Date Sun, 29 Jul 2007 21:04:56 GMT
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
>> On 7/29/07, Nick Kew <nick@webthing.com> wrote:
>>> Anyone who does is a self-selecting techie.  How hard can it be to
>>> list dependencies and where to get them?  Yes of course binary
>>> packages with shiny installers should bundle dependencies, but
>>> that's not at all the same as bundling in a source tarball.
>> No, because they'd have to hand-edit the project files to compile
>> depending upon which version of Expat they download.  IMO, that is
>> bogus - our barrier of entry should be as low as we can make it.  --
> 
> Ditto.  This doesn't say anything about a Solaris 2.6, or BSD install,
> or AIX, or HPUX, or any of dozens of combinations that APR should just
> compile with, out of the box.
> 
> If we continue down this myopic path, the apps that APR supports become
> less and less relevant.  And without such apps, APR itself is irrelevant.

Where do we draw a line? Or should we ship every dependency? Again, if
the user is going to build apr-util he/she surely can build expat too!

And should we ship it because we have non-upstream fixes? That's
non-sense, or we would have to bundle a lot of stuff. If fixes are
needed we could just bundle the patches.

And why expat? Can't we in the future provide a common layer for other
xml parsers? Who's going to keep expat up to date?

--
Davi Arnaut

Mime
View raw message