> > The second question: does a change of this magnitude warrant treating this > > as a major revision and bumping the version to 2.0? > > I don't have any problem to bump to version 2.0. But since Xerces-J has > redesignd their architecture and introduced the idea of XNI and pluggable > pipeline in version 2 of Xerces-J. I am afraid if we bump to version 2.0, > users may be confused and think we have port such idea over.
I can only speak for myself, but I don't assume any relationship between versions of Xerces-J and Xerces-C. In fact, I think of them as completely separate entities, with unique characteristics and development paths. They are, after all, unique products implemented in different languages. Is there some understanding that they have some current relationship other than being XML parsers maintained by Apache? I can't find anything on the Web site that states or implies this. Those who've been around a while know that there's a historical connection, but I don't think that's relevant. Even if such a relationship exists or is believed to exist, perhaps it's time to break it off, unless there is some sort of higher-level entity coordinating the two projects to make sure they proceed along similar lines. In the absence of such an entity, the two projects will surely diverge over time. I'd argue that they already have. Bottom line: I don't think Xerces-J should influence Xerces-C version numbering. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
