Thread: Re: [PATCHES] build/install xml2 when configured with libxml

Re: [PATCHES] build/install xml2 when configured with libxml

From
"Nikolay Samokhvalov"
Date:
On 4/15/07, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> wrote:
> Well, if we're going to make libxslt an explicit thing, then it'd be
> trivial to add an xslt transformation function into the core, and then
> I think we can claim equivalent support.  But we'll have to check the
> details, of course.
>
> I have been thinking, however, that I don't want to add more and more
> library dependencies into the server.  libxml2 was necessary to some
> extent.  But xslt functionality could easily be provided as a module.
> This would be easy to do and might be useful even for 8.3.  But I don't
> really know how to label that.  Having a contrib/xslt alongside
> contrib/xml2 would probably be confusing.  Ideas?

The current CVS' configure is really confusing: it has "--with-xslt"
option, while there is no XSLT support in the core. At least let's
change the option's comment to smth like "build with XSLT support (now
it is used for contrib/xml2 only)"...

--
Best regards,
Nikolay

Re: [PATCHES] build/install xml2 when configured with libxml

From
Andrew Dunstan
Date:

Nikolay Samokhvalov wrote:
>
> The current CVS' configure is really confusing: it has "--with-xslt"
> option, while there is no XSLT support in the core. At least let's
> change the option's comment to smth like "build with XSLT support (now
> it is used for contrib/xml2 only)"...
>

contrib is a misnomer at best. When 8.3 branches I intend to propose
that we abandon it altogether, in line with some previous discussions.

We can change the configure help text if people think it matters that
much - which seems to me much more potentially useful than changing
comments.

cheers

andrew

Re: [PATCHES] build/install xml2 when configured with libxml

From
"Nikolay Samokhvalov"
Date:
On 5/20/07, Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> wrote:
>
> contrib is a misnomer at best. When 8.3 branches I intend to propose
> that we abandon it altogether, in line with some previous discussions.
>
> We can change the configure help text if people think it matters that
> much - which seems to me much more potentially useful than changing
> comments.

Actually, I meant configure help text, not any comment in the code :-)

--
Best regards,
Nikolay

Re: [PATCHES] build/install xml2 when configured with libxml

From
Andrew Dunstan
Date:

Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
>
> Nikolay Samokhvalov wrote:
>>
>> The current CVS' configure is really confusing: it has "--with-xslt"
>> option, while there is no XSLT support in the core. At least let's
>> change the option's comment to smth like "build with XSLT support (now
>> it is used for contrib/xml2 only)"...
>>
>
> contrib is a misnomer at best. When 8.3 branches I intend to propose 
> that we abandon it altogether, in line with some previous discussions.
>
> We can change the configure help text if people think it matters that 
> much - which seems to me much more potentially useful than changing 
> comments.
>
>


On further consideration I don't see the necessity for this. We don't 
say this about lib-ossp-uuid although it too is only used for a contrib 
module.

cheers

andrew


Re: [PATCHES] build/install xml2 when configured with libxml

From
Andrew Dunstan
Date:

Nikolay Samokhvalov wrote:
> On 6/2/07, Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> wrote:
>> On further consideration I don't see the necessity for this. We don't
>> say this about lib-ossp-uuid although it too is only used for a contrib
>> module.
>
> And is it good? For that functionality I would also add comment
> describing that this "--with..." relates to contib only. What we have
> now is not absolutely correct situation when user could wrongly think
> that (s)he will have capabilities, just adding "--with-...", but (s)he
> won't.

Sure she will, in contrib. You keep on wanting to treat contrib as not 
part of Postgres. That's a mistake.

cheers

andrew


Re: [PATCHES] build/install xml2 when configured with libxml

From
"Nikolay Samokhvalov"
Date:
On 6/2/07, Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> wrote:
> On further consideration I don't see the necessity for this. We don't
> say this about lib-ossp-uuid although it too is only used for a contrib
> module.

And is it good? For that functionality I would also add comment
describing that this "--with..." relates to contib only. What we have
now is not absolutely correct situation when user could wrongly think
that (s)he will have capabilities, just adding "--with-...", but (s)he
won't.

-- 
Best regards,
Nikolay