xmlgraphics-fop-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Vincent Hennebert <vhenneb...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Table layout = auto functionality needed: bounty.
Date Fri, 26 Mar 2010 11:04:34 GMT

Adrian Cumiskey wrote:
> HI Simon,
> I'm not sure it would, a very complex subject that would require a lot of
> time just to understand all the considerations involved.  There is a good
> reason why it has not been implemented up to now.

Agreed. The table code is too complicated and would require too much
time to dive in. Even I have difficulties debugging my own code, and
I have built up quite some experience now...

The underlying data model is not appropriate and has been pushed beyond
its limits. I don’t think anything more can be done on tables because
that would inevitably break something.

Of course, that’s bad news for Peter... The only possibility IMO is to
implement some limited, ad hoc functionality that would work in some
specific use case. Maybe adapting the patch from Bugzilla #47347 to the
current Trunk is doable in a reasonable amount of time.

The other possibility is to refactor the whole layout engine...


> I think providing a more
> automated build/release process would be a far more suitable and achievable
> project for someone completely new to the project.
> Adrian.
> On 25 March 2010 07:24, Simon Pepping <spepping@leverkruid.eu> wrote:
>> FOP devs,
>> Would this be suitable for a GSoC project? It is certainly not
>> trivial, and the candidate should have a reasonable chance of success.
>> Simon
>> On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 04:57:47PM +0000, Peterdk wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>> I am wondering, I need a basic version of table-layout=auto. It's not yet
>>> implemented with FOP.
>>> I am willing to set a bounty of max 250$ for it, if it's implemented to a
>>> level that I can use it for my project.
>>> Are there any devs interested and willing to work on this? For the bounty
>>> it would be needed to be ready in about 3 months.
>>> I know there is a patch in bugzilla for a older rev. that gives basic
>>> functionality, but it fails to work when margin's are applied to the
>> parent
>>> block or the table itself. I have contacted the author of this patch, but
>> I
>>> would rather have a FOP dev work on auto-table-layout so the
>> functionality
>>> will be included in the trunk version so other users also benefit, and I
>>> prefer to support some FOP dev with some money rather then a other
>>> programmer.
>>> Anybody interested?
>>> Peter, NL
>> --
>> Simon Pepping
>> home page: http://www.leverkruid.eu

View raw message