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]