[ruby-core:32189] Re: merging nokogiri to ext/

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/