xmlgraphics-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Clay Leeds <the.webmaes...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: PDFBox
Date Tue, 24 Jun 2014 19:37:40 GMT
+1

Cheers!

Clay

--

"My religion is simple. My religion is kindness."
- HH The Dalai Lama of Tibet

> On Jun 20, 2014, at 5:48 AM, Chris Bowditch <bowditch_chris@hotmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi Simon,
> 
> 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
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Chris
> 
>> On 18/06/2014 14:20, Simon Steiner wrote:
>> 
>> Hi,
>> 
>> 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?
>> 
>> Thanks
> 

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, 7-Bit, 0 bytes)
View raw message