On Nov 5, 2007, at 8:25 AM, Scott Cantor wrote:

I would also like to suggest that we have all the infrastructure
issues worked out before we commit to migrating to Forrest. This
way we won't end up in a situation that Xerces-C++ 3.0.0 is right
now with autoconf where the person/people with the necessary
expertise is/are unable to commit time to finish the built system.

What's left to do? I know some platforms don't work, but honestly either the project supports those platforms or it doesn't. If yes, somebody on the core team has to be responsible for testing and maintaining them, and if not, you
don't support them and they shouldn't hold up a release.

It's not reasonable to me to hold up development for a platform or compiler for which nobody is donating time, a box to test on, or both. Put up or shut
up basically.

I'll chime in with support for Scott's view here. (And yes, I apologize that this is off-topic to the issue of build documentation).

As one of those responsible for getting Xerces 3.0 to the point it is now, (and it's been at that point for several years now), I can say that it works well for me. But we need community leadership to get it out the door, and I don't have the time for that. There seems to be auto* issues on a few platforms for 3.0, but those aren't platforms I have access to nor know anything about: it really is up to committers who can support those platforms to get things working there, or to suggest changes that will allow them to work, or (if needed) to come up with an alternate non auto* build system for those systems.

Boris, you offered earlier to take the lead in pushing 3.0 out the door. Are you still able to do that? (perhaps on a new thread...)

James



-- Scott



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to