Bring in http4s-scala-xml-1

[armanbilge]

Proof-of-concept for my point in #25 (comment).

This way we don't need two separate repos.

[rossabaker]

I'm going to defer entirely to @sjenna on this one. If the goal is to keep a state-of-the-art scala-xml-1, this makes sense. If the goal is to keep a minimally maintained project the way things were, the status quo is good.

[sjenna]

My use case for http4s-scala-xml-1 would probably benefit from getting the same updates, and I like how this eliminates redundancy. My concern would be that this holds back updates that actually use post-2.x features, but I don't think it's likely we'll need to make those kinds of changes here since http4s/http4s-fs2-data#3 points to a more functional future for XML anyway. Combining the targets like this is a good change.

[armanbilge]

I think there's some sort of semantic merge conflict going on here 🤔

[armanbilge]

It looks like the round-trip UTF8 test is broken in scala-xml-1.

[rossabaker]

My concern would be that this holds back updates that actually use post-2.x features, but I don't think it's likely we'll need to make those kinds of changes here since http4s/http4s-fs2-data#3 points to a more functional future for XML anyway.

I agree, and if we did need that sort of change, the 0.24 number is there for the taking.

[rossabaker]

[looks at latest property failures]

[what am I doing with my life?]

[armanbilge]

Thank you Ross! I can't approve my own PR for the obvious reasons but if everyone is happy I'm 👍

[sjenna]

@rossabaker, would it be appropriate to archive the http4s/http4s-scala-xml-1 repo following the next release of this repo?

[rossabaker]

@sjenna Yes. I proposed http4s/http4s-scala-xml-1#18 so its readme points back here. I don't think archival needs to wait on this release, but with the bugfixes, we should consider that release now anyway.