--lrZ03NoBR/3+SXJZ Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, Sep 09, 2010 at 01:40:34AM +0900, Yusuke ENDOH wrote: > Currently, we're discussing three different topics: >=20 > 1) REXML should be unbundled or not > 2) Nokogiri should be bundled or not > 3) all stdlib should be converted to gem, or not >=20 > First, we will NOT remove REXML from 1.9 for compatibility reason, > even if Nokogiri provides REXML-compatible layer. No matter how > anyone says, this is the fact. Please accept. Compatiblity is > not problem of "brave". >=20 > Next, the point 3 should be discussed in another thread. > You can't have it both ways at once. >=20 > This thread started for discussion about merging Nokogiri. > Let's focus on the point 2 in this thread. Thanks for keeping us on track. :-) > We should present advantage to bundle both Nokogiri and REXML. > I showed some pros (and cons) to committers (on Japanese IRC), and > received some rebuttals immediately: >=20 >=20 > pros: > - newbie tends to search library from stdlib first, but REXML > should not be used. By deprecating REXML (but not unbundled) > and providing Nokogiri, we can indicate to newbie the right > road. >=20 > -> rebuttal: even if it is really needed, it is enough to > deprecate REXML. I agree with this rebuttal. No XML parser is better than a poor one. OTOH, it seems that people like having an XML parser ship with Ruby. Why not ship a good one? > - we can save time for many Ruby users to type "gem install > nokogiri" >=20 > -> rebuttal: OTOH, it wastes time and HDD space for people who > do not use Nokogiri. The same argument could be made for any library in stdlib. Why waste someone's hard drive space with Psych when they never parse YAML? > - "gem install nokogiri" cannot be used on environment not > connected to internet. >=20 > -> question: is there people who uses Nokogiri on such a strict > environment? Not that I know of. > cons: > - Ruby distribution becomes enlarged; more maintainance effort is > needed (but I can believe Aaron will do so responsibly) I am happy maintaining Nokogiri, but I couldn't do it without Mike. I think we're both pretty responsible maintainers. :-) > - Nokogiri may not preserve separate releases I'm not sure about this. Other stdlib package have had separate releases (rake, etc). Though, I hope that stdlib is turned to gems so this is easier (I'll respond to the gems thread). > IMO, I don't think it is good idea to refute the rebuttals. > It would be good to find another advantage. Do you have? As I mentioned earlier, I think people like having an XML parser ship with ruby. It would be advantageous to Ruby users if a good XML parser shipped with Ruby. My goal is to make sure that Ruby users have the best possible experience when dealing with XML in Ruby. REXML is a stumbling block. I think the best options to improve the situation are: 1. Remove REXML so that users must search for an XML library 2. Package nokogiri so that users have a better alternative 3. Remove REXML *and* package nokogiri I understand we cannot remove REXML for 1.9.x, but maybe we should consider packaging nokogiri so people have an alternative? I would like to see #2 for Ruby 1.9.3+, then #3 for Ruby 2.0. --=20 Aaron Patterson http://tenderlovemaking.com/ --lrZ03NoBR/3+SXJZ Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (Darwin) iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJMiDUUAAoJEJUxcLy0/6/GjFkH/1k2AMWNzQhBMd/dGo3fpnp8 rqHd44B1ZrgqL9geo3L9q5YzdGqVGKrA8wC1bT43LDyMTjrGcLXlwMYKbvo73N/W uTslyFnFVYuoeMQzFD8MB33lsfzeFqvC1b8sBMMNarKBH7f35zmHprfktbTlM1DE sN/02ZaKIMJeuGT8SP16Y7bQ+J2tKFzm7ndcyZlXSbCgQo5Rinqq+DDt3tKY0wnT vzkUR688jQ2WkGL+5DJmcvWnK5yY7H96hqq24SVp4q+ymYALVVF6GxdWSdy72Ete /utpheIiZfip1bjNAZxFOGVBcOpU7FfOhmMEXDq+CM2rMNEKSCB3gjnq7dIqBts= =KJoK -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --lrZ03NoBR/3+SXJZ--