[openi18n-im:01278] Re: moving from csconv to iconv?

> From: Jens Petersen <[email protected]>
> Are there any known issues with using iconv instead of csconv?
> Ideally I think we should do this in the 12.2 development
> timeframe I would say.

The csconv carries the wrapper to iconv as iconv_relay, which
should be small, so if we modify csconv not to load any 
icuconv side of code/data unless it is required, we can
maintain ABI while we painlessly move to iconv.

> From: Motonobu Ichimura <[email protected]>
> so I would like propose 
> 
> 1) Extend libiml API's to  and capsulize conversion library in these API. 
> 2) Modify each LE to use 1).
>    We should take commercial/external LE packages into consideration.
> 3) LE SPI speficication tells LE developers to use 1).

Sounds like a good plan.

> 1) breaks API, and may break ABI. so I'd like to suggest these
     changes will be done after r12_2 release.

LEIF is designed to be possibly upward compatible when it is enhanced, 
so it can be handled such a way that who does not use the new capability
the ABI will be maintained.

Having said that, it would be appropriate to be done after r12_2.

Hideki