On Thu, Jun 26, 2003 at 04:33:46PM +0200, Andi Gutmans wrote: > I think it's customary today to have the XML technologies as an integral > part of the core development platform. Which is why virtually all Unixes have it installed by default.
> IMO it's important enough for us to bundle. As Zeev mentioned, if this ends > up being a problem, we can always unbundle. Which is why we should use them on Unix. libc is important too. We don't bundle that. What are the (version) problems with libxml at the moment? If libxml was difficult to compile or not widely used or a moving target, then it might be a good idea to bundle it. None of it is true. Except that on Windows it is not widely used (yet). sqlite is not widely available yet. So bundling that may make sense. I'm repeating myself. I should let this rest and do something useful. You guys will make it possible to use the system wide libxml:) -- Adam > Andi > > At 04:22 PM 26/6/2003 +0300, Zeev Suraski wrote: > >At 16:09 26/06/2003, Adam Dickmeiss wrote: > >>On Thu, Jun 26, 2003 at 03:53:09PM +0300, Zeev Suraski wrote: > >>> FWIW, that's one of the key reasons I think we should default to use the > >>> bundled libxml, and only use the system library if the user explicitly > >>> requested that. I think we're going to bundle libxml in beta1 to see > >>how > >>> well this concept works. > >>Bundling gives many problems. So if a Unix machine has libxml/libxslt > >>installed (most do) and if that version is supported by PHP the configure > >>should use that (and not a bundled version). If the PHP people > >>only allows a very strict set of libxml versions that's a sign > >>of a problem in ext/xml.* (not in libxml). libxml API doesn't change. > > > >We differ, I think that the problems linked with bundling are small in > >comparison to the gain we get from considering the XML library as an > >integral of PHP. None of us is talking about the API, Rob wasn't talking > >about the API either - he was talking about the actual behavior. If > >someone would want to install PHP with his system libxml, he'd be able to > >do it, and then he'd get his system's libxml behavior, for better or > >worse. I don't think that anybody suggested to make the XML modules > >dependent on specific versions of libxml, ever. I certainly haven't. > >I think that beta1 will give us some clues as to how much of a real world > >problem we get by defaulting to use our own version of libxml. If we see > >that it's too much of a headache, defaulting to use the system library (if > >available) shouldn't be difficult at all. > > > >Zeev > > > > > >-- > >PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List > >To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- Adam Dickmeiss mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.indexdata.dk Index Data T: +45 33410100 Mob.: 212 212 66 -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
