Xavier Bachelot | 12 Feb 00:20 2008

XML::Xerces 2.8.0 ?

Hi,

Is there a XML::Xerces 2.8.0 counterpart to xerces-c 2.8.0 ?
XML::Xerces 2.7.0 (latest, afaict) refuses to compile against xerces-c 
2.8.0. Alternatively, do I need to trick it to compile against the 
mismatching version ?

Regards,
Xavier
Jason Stewart | 12 Feb 02:22 2008
Picon

Re: XML::Xerces 2.8.0 ?

Hi Xavier,

On 2/12/08, Xavier Bachelot <xavier <at> bachelot.org> wrote:

> Is there a XML::Xerces 2.8.0 counterpart to xerces-c 2.8.0 ?
> XML::Xerces 2.7.0 (latest, afaict) refuses to compile against xerces-c
> 2.8.0. Alternatively, do I need to trick it to compile against the
> mismatching version ?

Heh, heh... No that safeguard was put there to ensure your happiness.
It is almost guaranteed not to compile because of API changes that
happen between versions.

There is no XML::Xerces-2.8 series. This is because the code has been
reorganized into the Xerces-3.0 line - so it is actually part of the
Xerces-C code now, a sub-project of Xerces-C and not it's own project.
But sadly, Xerces-3.0 has still not been released.

It will take a fairly large amount of work to put out a 2.8 release,
and my free time is currently used up. I would rather suggest you use
2.7 until 3.0 is released. If someone is desperately needing 2.8 they
can voice it on the list...

Cheers, jas.
Xavier Bachelot | 12 Feb 10:33 2008

Re: XML::Xerces 2.8.0 ?

Hi Jason,

Thx for your quick answer.

Jason Stewart wrote:
> Hi Xavier,
> 
> On 2/12/08, Xavier Bachelot <xavier <at> bachelot.org> wrote:
> 
>> Is there a XML::Xerces 2.8.0 counterpart to xerces-c 2.8.0 ?
>> XML::Xerces 2.7.0 (latest, afaict) refuses to compile against xerces-c
>> 2.8.0. Alternatively, do I need to trick it to compile against the
>> mismatching version ?
> 
> Heh, heh... No that safeguard was put there to ensure your happiness.
> It is almost guaranteed not to compile because of API changes that
> happen between versions.
>
Yeah, that's what I thought, but I wanted to make sure.

> There is no XML::Xerces-2.8 series. This is because the code has been
> reorganized into the Xerces-3.0 line - so it is actually part of the
> Xerces-C code now, a sub-project of Xerces-C and not it's own project.
> But sadly, Xerces-3.0 has still not been released.
>
Any release schedule for Xerces-3.0 ?

> It will take a fairly large amount of work to put out a 2.8 release,
> and my free time is currently used up. I would rather suggest you use
> 2.7 until 3.0 is released. If someone is desperately needing 2.8 they
(Continue reading)


Gmane