Re: --enable-xml instead of --with-libxml?

Nikolay Samokhvalov wrote:
> On 3/27/07, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Where are we on this? Peter thought the consistency makes sense, but if
> > we can provide functionality that doesn't require libxml, why not
> > do it?
>
>
> I'm still for --enable-xml and putting _everything_ XML-related under this
> option. My main points are:
> - we cannot guarantee that existing libxml2-free functions will not require
> them in the future (because libxml2 contains useful routines);
> - libxml2-free functions (e.g. Peter's XML mapping functions,
> http://momjian.us/main/writings/pgsql/sgml/functions-xml.html#FUNCTIONS-XML-MAPPING)
> produce XML values, but we cannot use XPath function for them unless we have
> libxml2;
> - people will make errors, trying to understand what needs libxml2, and
> what doesn't -- approach "all or nothing" is simple and straightforward;
>
>
> Well, it seems that I have no more arguments :-) If there is no objections,
> I'll send the patch tonight.
> If I am wrong and it's better to leave libxml2-free capabilities, then IMHO
> we need to reflect it explicitly in the docs, what requires libxml2, and
> what doesn't

Agreed, let's do the later and update the documentation. Also, do we
output a helpful message if someone tries to use a libxml2 function that
isn't available.

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com

+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +