xmlgraphics-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Pascal Sancho <psancho....@gmail.com>
Subject Re: PDFBox
Date Fri, 20 Jun 2014 14:45:53 GMT

My +1

2014-06-20 14:48 GMT+02:00 Chris Bowditch <bowditch_chris@hotmail.com>:
> Yes I did argue against an upgrade to 1.6 for the reasons stated at that
> time, i.e. improved annotation support. However, nearly another year on,
> Java 8 has been out for a while and additional reasons to upgrade emerge,
> i.e. allow us to leverage PDFBox improvements. Therefore, I'm +1 on going to
> 1.6.
> However, I'm -1 on rushing to 7 or 8 for the reasons previously stated. FOP
> is a server process who user base will expect to run on a variety of
> different older operating systems including some mainframe systems, where
> upgrading Java requires the installation of many o/s patches. It can be very
> difficult to get approval to upgrade the o/s on such systems and therefore
> make it very difficult to move to newer versions of Java on such systems. So
> until they catch up a bit and there is a compelling reason to go to 7 or 8,
> I say moving to 1.6 for the imminent v2.0 release is a good plan.
> BTW, I think we should keep general@ in the loop as this decision has an
> impact on all the sub projects in XML Graphics umbrella
> On 18/06/2014 14:20, Simon Steiner wrote:
>> As part of the work on merging fonts in PDFs:
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FOP-2302
>> I am using PDFBox 2.0 instead of 1.8 since that version has switched from
>> AWT to its own fontfile parser/renderer to give better support for different
>> fonts.
>> This version requires Java 6 but FOP is currently supporting Java 5, does
>> Java 5 still need to be supported?


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

View raw message