xml in fptools?

Simon Marlow simonmarhaskell at gmail.com
Mon May 15 06:51:04 EDT 2006

Isaac Jones wrote:

> I'm wondering if we've ever discussed putting an XML parser into
> fptools.  I'm asking because cabal-install would like to use xml-rpc,
> but it drags in a bunch of dependencies that aren't in fptools.
> What do other languages do:
>  * Python seems to have XML and XML-RPC as standard libraries
>  * Same with ruby
>  * Not java (shocking): http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.3/docs/api/
> I guess that HaXml probably can't get into fptools because of license
> incompatibilities, but hxml and HXmlToolbox both have MIT licenses,
> and so could probably be put into fptools:
> http://www.flightlab.com/~joe/hxml/
> http://www.fh-wedel.de/~si/HXmlToolbox/

At this stage I don't think we should be asking what is "in fptools". 
My aim for GHC 6.6 is to have a core set of packages shipped with GHC 
(probably base, haskell98, template-haskell, unix/Win32, Cabal) and any 
other packages are shipped at the disgression of the distributor.

In practice this will mean that our standard binary dists (.tar.bz2 and 
Win32 installers) will probably continue to contain a similar set of 
packages as in 6.4.x, modulo some reorganisation.  However, on systems 
with decent package managers like Gentoo/Debian/*BSD there will be a 
basic GHC installation and packages can be added and upgraded using the 
system package tools.

Note that this avoids licensing issues; if there are multiple XML 
packages with different licenses, the programmer gets to choose which 
one to use.

I'd like to see the community settle on a single XML API if possible, 
but I imagine that will probably happen over time in any case.  Perhaps 
someone could offer to lead a group to work on standardising an API?


More information about the Libraries mailing list