On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 09:51:08AM +0100, Tony Graham wrote: > (Sorry to take a while to respond, but it's been busy here.) > > On Tue, Jun 10 2008 01:31:05 +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > On 06/06/2008, at 7:18 AM, Tony Graham wrote: > >> On Thu, Jun 05 2008 07:57:07 +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > ... > >> There probably are enough libxslt users that there would be quite a > >> few > >> of those users who could gainfully contribute, but that raises the > >> question of why there aren't more than the dedicated few currently > >> working on libxslt. > > > > That's the same with many (most?) open source projects... > > Yes. I have a semi-coherent theory about a log relationship between > numbers of users and interested users and between them and people who > can provide code.
I would say that correlates my experience. There is also a net trend factor, i.e. if what you're working on is related to current hype in media you're suddenly more likely to find people with 'free time'. > >> I would be willing, but I have other commitments on my open source > >> free > >> time. > > > > Don't we all... ;-) of course. > So how do we proceed? It's not going to get very far if it's just you > and me moaning about not having enough free time. I'm sure a poll of > people on this list (or of people you meet on the street) would show > that most people feel they don't have enough free time. > > It seems to me that it's still a bit premature to say "let's just make a > wiki and thrash out the design", even if someone were to stump up for > some non-free time. > > Daniel, if I may ask, in an ideal world, how would you like to see an > XSLT 2.0 version of libxslt be developed? Ouch, hard question. In an ideal world you get a person with passion for the technology, who understand the technical bits and a sponsor willing to pay him full time to implement it, until it's finished. I'm not sure we should plan for an ideal world. I'm personally not that thrilled by XSLT-2.0/XPath-2.0 (probably because I don't use XSLT much), and clearly my employer has no plan to push me to implement it (libvirt takes most of my time nowadays). Maybe a progressive approach can be done, first a update of XPath in libxml2 to grok XPath2, and then maybe a separate libxslt2 library on top of it which could reuse libexslt and bits of libxslt. It's a bit hard for me to draft technical directions because I didn't tried to learn the version 2 of XPath/XSLT/... IMHO it's way to big, I have also a givem theory linking the size of a specification to the manpower needed to implement it and test it fully, and in C the ratio is especially large (though the implementation is IMHO more useful). Daniel -- Red Hat Virtualization group http://redhat.com/virtualization/ Daniel Veillard | virtualization library http://libvirt.org/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] | libxml GNOME XML XSLT toolkit http://xmlsoft.org/ http://veillard.com/ | Rpmfind RPM search engine http://rpmfind.net/ _______________________________________________ xslt mailing list, project page http://xmlsoft.org/XSLT/ [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/xslt
