[libxml-devel] Libxsl 0.6.0 release

[Charlie Savage]

Trans wrote:
> 
> On Jul 8, 12:03 pm, Charlie Savage <c... at savagexi.com> wrote:
>> Trans wrote:
>>
> 
> Yes, that's it a bit of annoyance, and there had been some talk about
> changing it. "_ruby" is fine, though maybe "_binding" would be more
> descriptive?

Either way is fine - libxslt_ruby or libxslt_binding.  I don't feel 
strongly.

>>>> Last, the project name on rubyforge is libxsl which is incorrect.  It
>>>> should be libxslt since its wrapping the libxslt library
>>>> (http://xmlsoft.org/XSLT/).  Is it possible to change names?
>>> That would require creating a new rubyforge project. Do you think it's
>>> worth the transition?
>> No, not really.  But it would be nice to be consistent.
> 
> True. I am willing to transition. I suppose if Sean feels it's worth
> it the we can move forward with it.
> 
>> As for renaming the gems from libxml-ruby to libxml and libxslt-ruby to
>> libxslt, do you think that's worth it?  Seems like it would break
>> upgrading (you'd have libxml-ruby and libxml installed, which one wins?).
> 
> I think it is, b/c it creates consistency across the gem name, the
> library directory name and the module name.

Right now:

gem name: libxslt-ruby
library name: libxslt
module name:  XML::XSLT

> Indeed, there is a potential for library conflict (an example of the
> weaknesses of Ruby's require system actually). We will just have to
> make a special emphases to users about this transition. A good way to
> handle it might be to release as libxml-ruby/libxslt-ruby and then
> immediately release the same versions as libxml/libxslt in order to
> facilitate a smooth a transition as possible.

Hmm.  Changing the gem names is causing to cause problems because you 
might think you've upgraded to libxml version 7, but in fact you're 
still pulling in libxml-ruby version 2.  I see no way around that.

Maybe the thing to do is change the name for Ruby 1.9.  For libxml-ruby 
require a ruby version of less than 1.9, for libxml require a ruby 
version of 1.9 or greater.  If that is doable (not sure it is), then at 
least you can't have a conflict.

Charlie
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature
Size: 3237 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
URL: <http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/libxml-devel/attachments/20080708/0c2cd1b3/attachment.bin>