On 12/2/2012 11:52 AM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
We _were_ looking at outright throwing std.xml away at one point and then replacing it later, given how bad it is, but we never quite did that, and at this point, I wouldn't expect it to happen. We've been focusing more on avoiding breaking code of late, and so, doing something like that probably wouldn't be deemed acceptable at this point.
For this case (and others like it) I strongly suggest putting the revamp in something called std.xml2, and keep std.xml, but let std.xml wither and die away of its own accord rather than killing it.
For example, after a while it can be removed from the web site documentation.
