[crossfire] xslt parser for unit tests, request for comment

[tchize]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Hi everyone,

unit test code outputs it's result in .xml files. Those can later be
parsed using XSLT to create report webpages. Now am wondering which of
those 3 solutions is the best to create the report:


1st option: choose a xslt parser, (like gnome's libxslt) and use it's
standalone command line utility to generate reports.
pro: easy to integrate, no need for configure thingies
against: additionnal dependency for crossfire code

2nd option: integrate a standalone xslt parser (like sablotron) in the
crossfire code repository (crossfire/test/xslt ?), compile it and run
it at unit testing time
pro: no new dependency (assuming the parser has no dependency)
against: have ot integrate this xslt parser configure code in
crossfire one (should be quite easy), need to find a parser which has
very little dependecy to be worth

3rd option: have configure check the presence of various known xslt
parsers. As all XSLT1.0 compliant parsers are supposed to produce same
output from given input, all configure has to do is to discover the
command line to use
pro: no fixed dependency (*any* xslt parser, could even provide a
- --with-xslt='myparser -input $1 -output $2' configure option), no need
for very complicated xslt job
against: requires a xslt processor, might hit bugs in some processors


note: in all cases, unit test should work even without existing
processor installed (user will simply not have the nice html output)

Personnaly, i like the 3rd, and of course i like the 1st as it can
later be converted to the 3rd. Also, the 2nd one is very complicated
and crazy, so i like it too.



More seriously,  i plan to opt for the option 3

comments?

Tchize, servant of the Fido's church
 

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFEOp4DHHGOa1Q2wXwRAp8dAKCHnCujcEm5bqisiEGeMiYa643ovQCcDQcY
qpL/gqCC2aW+UTYo7efaJa0=
=gC75
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----