Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-cocoon-dev-archive@cocoon.apache.org Received: (qmail 90398 invoked by uid 500); 1 Aug 2003 11:05:19 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@cocoon.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Reply-To: dev@cocoon.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@cocoon.apache.org Received: (qmail 90384 invoked from network); 1 Aug 2003 11:05:18 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO pulse.betaversion.org) (217.158.110.65) by daedalus.apache.org with SMTP; 1 Aug 2003 11:05:18 -0000 Received: (qmail 12695 invoked from network); 1 Aug 2003 11:05:17 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO apache.org) (stefano@80.105.91.155) by pulse.betaversion.org with SMTP; 1 Aug 2003 11:05:17 -0000 Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2003 13:05:16 +0200 Subject: Re: [Vote] Make Xalan the default xslt processor again [was: RE: Releasing 2.1] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v552) From: Stefano Mazzocchi To: dev@cocoon.apache.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In-Reply-To: Message-Id: <07F027DD-C410-11D7-86D5-000393D2CB02@apache.org> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.552) X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N On Friday, Aug 1, 2003, at 10:16 Europe/Rome, Carsten Ziegeler wrote: > There are several problems with xsltc which makes Cocoon in some > scenarios unusable. We have several problem reports and I know > from many customers that they all had to disable xsltc and use > xslt in their environment. > > It's ok to have xsltc as the default for development cycles to > help the xalan team find bugs, but I think it's not good to > have it as the default for the final release as most users > have to change this default setting anyway. > > So, I'm +1 on making xalan the default for the final release again. > > What do you think? +1 -- Stefano.