xmlgraphics-fop-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Manuel Mall ...@arcus.com.au>
Subject Re: DO NOT REPLY [Bug 35939] New: - [PATCH] Port of 0.20.5 Driver.java class
Date Mon, 01 Aug 2005 09:37:37 GMT
Andreas,

no argument from me against what you are proposing and also Joerg in [1]. We 
can still have a Driver.java for backwards compatibility for those who want 
to "plug and play" either in the product, or in a separate jar 
(fop-compat.jar?), or just here in BugZilla.

Manuel

[1] http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=fop-dev&m=108947697611032&w=2

On Mon, 1 Aug 2005 02:20 am, Andreas L Delmelle wrote:
> On Jul 30, 2005, at 17:34, Manuel Mall wrote (on bugzilla):
>
> Manuel,
> Devs,
>
> > To be able to simply replace a 0.20.5 fop.jar with 1.0dev fop.jar I
> > have written
> > a backwards compatible apps.Driver.java class. Everything in the class
> > has been
> > labelled as deprecated.
>
> FWIW: Personally, besides the compatibility issue, I'm not too happy
> with the current situation where the very same class is used for both
> command-line and embedded use (Fop.java) --one class acts both as a
> standalone application and as a component.
> That's considered an anti-pattern they call "Subversion of Control" in
> Avalon terminology[1] :-)
>
> I've been checking the discussion on fop-dev concerning the removal of
> Driver[2]. From the looks of it, at least one developer had similar
> reservations about removing it. It's a pity the discussion itself
> remained rather superficial.
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> Andreas
>
> [1] http://excalibur.apache.org/framework/component-design.html
> [2] http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=fop-dev&m=108942539604883&w=2

Mime
View raw message