[Libxml2] libxml vs. libxml2
cfis at savagexi.com
Tue Aug 21 11:12:52 EDT 2007
> On 8/18/07, *Christopher J. Bottaro* <cjbottaro at alumni.cs.utexas.edu
> <mailto:cjbottaro at alumni.cs.utexas.edu>> wrote:
> I don't care, either way... as long a some gem is made official and I
> don't have to worry about it. I dunno, maybe continue with the orig
> project since already when you search for libxml on rubyforge, two
> projects come up (libxml and libxml2) and I think that might confuse
> My company is considering moving our app to Rails and that decision
> it's very dependent on the performance and reliability of this
> project. :)
> Thanks for continuing on with this project.
> -- Christopher
> On 8/17/07, TRANS <transfire at gmail.com <mailto:transfire at gmail.com>>
> > Crazy, crazy. Sean appeared out the blue aether yesterday, and
> gave me
> > admin rights to the original libxml project. So I suppose the fork
> > isn't necessary after all. But I'll put it to the community just the
> > same to be sure. Should we stick to the old project or go forward
> > the fork?
> > T.
> > P.S. If we do stick with the original, I will still have the
> > repository converted to SVN and do some clean up.
> I think sticking to the original would be good. There are quite a few
> links out there pointing to the original project. It would be easier.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 3237 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Url : http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/libxml2-discuss/attachments/20070821/df477312/attachment.bin
More information about the Libxml2-discuss