Mailing-List: contact general-help@xmlgraphics.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: general@xmlgraphics.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: local policy)
Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2010 22:48:26 +0200
From: Jeremias Maerki <dev@jeremias-maerki.ch>
To: general@xmlgraphics.apache.org
Subject: Re: Status of the new color infrastructure
In-Reply-To: <20100630191310.GB3446@leverkruid.eu>
References: <20100630154522.2A54.60BA733C@jeremias-maerki.ch>
 <20100630191310.GB3446@leverkruid.eu>
Message-Id: <20100630222431.8A24.60BA733C@jeremias-maerki.ch>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On 30.06.2010 21:13:10 Simon Pepping wrote:
> Does this mean that you want to finish your color work and merge it
> into trunk before a release?

No, not necessarily. I wanted to discuss what the best course of action
is concerning the new color infrastructure. Releasing XGC as is causes
ColorExt to become unusable as a name for the new extended Color class
since my changes are not backwards-compatible except if we accept a lot
of memory overhead for the compatibility (which I don't want to). I'll
have to find a different catchy and short name for that class
(suggestions welcome BTW) and deprecate ColorExt later.

> I am not happy with that from a project management point of view. It
> is best to take the decision to make a release, and do that. There is
> always a nice addition tomorrow, but there is also always a next
> release.

Except for the little thing called backwards-compatibility. ColorExt is
new in XGC and we already know it has to change in an incompatible way
before its first release. The problem is that this has ripples into FOP.
That's why we have to at least shortly discuss it.

> Many users want a FOP release, so they can use two years of
> improvements and bug fixes without having to deal with subversion
> check-outs and build tools.

I know, and I also know that you spend your free time and energy on this.
And I'm sorry I didn't have this finished earlier.

If you want to do the release now, that's fine. I just need a new class
name for the new ColorExt class. And I need people to know the
consequences of a release right now.

But I've just thought of a better alternative:
Moving (!) ColorExt back to FOP where it was and moving
GrayScaleConverter to FOP solves the whole problem with minimal effort
in FOP Trunk. The ColorConverter interface is fine as it is and can stay
there. This will also restore backwards-compatibility for FOP's ColorExt
and CMYKColorSpace classes which were already present in 0.95 but
removed instead of deprecated. That would take half an hour at most
tomorrow morning.

WDYT?

> Simon
>=20
> On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 04:08:36PM +0200, Jeremias Maerki wrote:
> > As a heads-up since Simon seems to be back to preparing the XGC release=
:
> >=20
> > The new basic color infrastructure stands in the dev branch. And it
> > seems to cover everything necessary for XSL-FO. There are two tricky
> > things around this:
> >=20
> > 1. I don't really like getting the current ColorExt from Trunk into the
> > XGC release. The ColorExt in the color branch isn't compatible, but
>=20
> --=20
> Simon Pepping
> home page: http://www.leverkruid.eu
>=20


Jeremias Maerki


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@xmlgraphics.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@xmlgraphics.apache.org