Re: NSXML* classes changed to use libxml2 directly... Should we merge this into the trunk?

[Fred Kiefer]

I don't quite see your point here. From a quick look into NSXMLParser I 
have the impression that we currently only support XML parsing without 
libxml. And this seems to work well enough for NIB loading. (I mean XML 
based NIBs we support the binary NIBs as well)

We already report in configure when optional libraries are missing. That 
way new users should be aware of missing functionality due to there 
limited setup.


On 25.01.2012 11:11, Gregory Casamento wrote:
> Any time we allow a user to build without a given dependency they are
> getting a sub standard experience with GNUstep.   I do consider nib reading
> to be a critical feature of GNUstep, and I think it's foolish to allow
> users to build without features like this.
>
> It hurts us to have so many optional libraries.   Since most potential
> users may just be trying us out, when they are able to build without XML
> support or without Unicode support without various other things, thy get a
> bad impression of GNUstep because we've allowed them to get a bad
> experience with it.
>
> We needn't worry about our dependency list as its not really that long.
>
> GC
>
> On Wednesday, January 25, 2012, Riccardo Mottola<address@hidden>
> wrote:
> > Hi,
> > > I believe that nib reading will also cease to function,
> > > Maybe ... I haven't checked ... I thought it used NSXMLParser, and thus
> doesn't need libxml2.
> > Well, nib reading is not an essential feature, form file reading is. If
> I'm building a minimal setup, I think as nib reading a bonus, nice to have,
> but if it doesn't work..
> > > I prefer it as a semi-hard dependency ... we should build without it,
> but the classes which need it should just fail upon initialisation.
> > That's my line of thought too.
> >
> > Riccardo
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gnustep-dev mailing list
> address@hidden
> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnustep-dev