incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jürgen Schmidt <jogischm...@googlemail.com>
Subject Re: agg and epm are still in svn repo.
Date Thu, 10 Nov 2011 15:52:23 GMT
On 11/10/11 4:09 PM, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
> Hello Jürgen;
>
> I value your feedback on this issue, and I will explain:
>
> First of all agg as it is/was is not an IP threat and, in
> general, the rules on how to deal with all the other
> dependencies were not in place when I did the update anyways.
>
> 1) I updated it to version 2.4: this is the last version
> under a BSD license. It was supported by the internal build
> system so I doubt anyone complains about having it up to
> date.
my main concern here is why you haven't updated the tar file with a 
newer version and used the same mechanism as for all other 3rd party libs.

>
> 2) I disabled it by default simply because it's not really
> used in the build. I doubt anyone complains about having off
> by default something that is not used.
>
> I also learned about, and killed, a header that supported
> the GPC extension which is not AL2 compatible,
>
> I cannot say this has brought any benefit at all but there's
> nothing counterproductive as agg was never really productive.

ok, drop counterproductive but i still don't understand why you have 
checked in it at all. The update if necessary could have been done at a 
later time as well.

>
> Now about --enable-system-agg; this option is a no-op as all
> linux/BSD distributions, that I know of, carry version 2.5
> of agg which is explicitly prohibited in OOo. This was done
> by SUN, not by me, perhaps because it's GPL'd now or maybe
> do to API changes, but it doesn't look like it.
>
why not analyzing if possible to use it? As it is optional 
(default=disabled) anyway it would be much easier.

> I kept agg around because I think it's important to keep the
> last BSD-licensed version in SVN (if we remove it we can bring
> it back anytime) and because it may find some uses elsewhere
> (anyone in need of a C++ rendering engine, like for SVG? ;-) ).
>
> Further cleanage of the configure script (which I hate to
> manipulate to tell you the truth) or even removing agg is
> relatively easy.
you can always ask if others can help. I can think also about much more 
interesting stuff but some things have to done at the moment ;-)

Juergen

>
> Pedro.
>
> --- On Thu, 11/10/11, Jürgen Schmidt<jogischmidt@googlemail.com>  wrote:
>
>
>> wrote:
>>> Hi Maho;
>>>
>>> I personally didn't plan to remove agg. I like it as
>>> option and license wise it's OK so I have no pland to
>>> remove it, at least for now.
>>
>> well the question really is why you have checked it in this
>> way and has
>> disabled it directly afterwards. That doesn't make any
>> sense and it was
>> counterproductive from my pov.
>>
>> It was initially handled as all other 3rd party modules and
>> we could
>> have dropped it and could have kept the option to use it
>> (if somebody
>> wants) with the option --with-system-agg. Default would be
>> to disable it.
>>
>> I think it would make sense if we follow all the same
>> rules.
>>
>> Juergen
>>
>>
>>>
>>> I did notice it's still getting built on our port and
>>> I have to look at why. I think when I attempt to
>> build
>>> AOOo from the tarball it doesn't get built but there
>>> are other ugly issues with icu there.
>>>
>>> About epm I don't know, I guess we can remove that
>>> directory now.
>>>
>>> Pedro.
>>>
>>> --- On Wed, 11/9/11, Maho NAKATA<maho@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> From: Maho NAKATA<maho@apache.org>
>>>> Subject: agg and epm are still in svn repo.
>>>> To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>>> Cc: pgf@apache.org
>>>> Date: Wednesday, November 9, 2011, 7:47 PM
>>>> Hi,
>>>> while porting AOOo to FreeBSD, pgf@ noticed that
>>>> agg and epm are still in svn repo.
>>>> is it correct? Should we remove them?
>>>>
>>>> thanks
>>>>     Nakata Maho
>>>>
>>
>>


Mime
View raw message