Mailing-List: contact dev-help@forrest.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@forrest.apache.org
Received-SPF: neutral (nike.apache.org: local policy)
Message-ID: <476AA40C.8050108@apache.org>
Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2007 18:19:08 +0100
From: Ferdinand Soethe <ferdinand@apache.org>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (Windows/20071031)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: dev@forrest.apache.org
Subject: Re: Plans for integrating FOP .94
References: <47523F47.80108@apache.org>
 <20071206072750.GJ248@igg.indexgeo.com.au> <475E47F2.3030902@apache.org>
 <1197366443.5807.22.camel@localhost> <475E7B4E.2060301@apache.org>
 <1197410998.6218.16.camel@cartman> <20071212075557.GM248@igg.indexgeo.com.au>
 <14291818.post@talk.nabble.com> <4761260B.9020902@apache.org>
 <20071220040349.GA1013@igg.indexgeo.com.au>
In-Reply-To: <20071220040349.GA1013@igg.indexgeo.com.au>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

David Crossley wrote:

> Would you please be more explicit in your svn commit
> message for this block jar. In the past we have always
> mentioned the revision number from which it was built.
> The commit log can be edited:
> svn propedit svn:log --revprop -r603892 ...

As far as I understand the block was build from the sources
that were used to build all our cocoon blocks and FOP 0.94.
The code of the block itself, I understand, was adapted for
FOP 0.94. The source is included in the jar.

Should I simply say so in the message?


> Also we need to know what are the source changes.

Sources of the block are included. How best to document
changes of source code we don't maintain?

> Perhaps link to a Jira issue.

Updating to FOP 0.94 is not an issue yet. Should I create one?

Best regards,
Ferdinand Soethe