Tom Lane wrote:
> Michael Fuhr <mike@fuhr.org> writes:
>
>> contrib/xml2 currently has PG_MODULE_MAGIC in xslt_proc.c, which
>> results in a runtime error on systems that built the module without
>> support for libxslt per the comments in the Makefile. Should
>> PG_MODULE_MAGIC be in xpath.c instead?
>>
>
> [ examines xml2/Makefile ... ] Yeah, sure looks that way. Will fix.
>
> Even more interesting would be to fix things so that xml2 gets built as
> part of the regular contrib build, but I'm not sure if we're ready to
> add stuff to the configure script for the sole benefit of a contrib
> module. I'd be more willing to do it if there were a long-term plan for
> putting libxml-dependent code into the core. Do we have a roadmap yet
> for XML development? I thought there was a session at the anniversary
> conference devoted to sketching one, but if anything came out of that
> I missed it.
>
>
Me too.
Part of the trouble is that support for the standard will require
support in the parser, so we need to decide if we want to go down that
road. Personally I think we should, but it would make a significant
change from what we have available now. Peter seemed a bit more
ambivalent about it, though.
cheers
andrew
