xmlgraphics-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Chris Bowditch <bowditch_ch...@hotmail.com>
Subject Re: Releasing XGC, Batik and FOP
Date Thu, 24 Jul 2014 10:16:21 GMT
On 23/07/2014 17:55, Vincent Hennebert wrote:
> On 23/07/14 12:05, Manuel Mall wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Just a thought on this topic:
>>
>> Changing the minimum JDK requirement is quite a big step. If FOP 2.0 
>> is released with JDK 1.5 minimum requirements you probably don't want 
>> to change this until you get to Fop 3.0. Users would typically expect 
>> 2.x releases to maintain this sort of major backwards compatibility 
>> characteristic. As a user I certainly would be upset if let's say a 
>> few month after 2.0 release 2.1 comes out with minor enhancements and 
>> bug fixes and it suddenly increases the minimum JDK level because a 
>> JDK 1.6 dependency was introduced in trunk and I have Fop 2.0 running 
>> in a 1.5 production environment that can't be changed in a hurry.
>>
>> So, in my opinion declare Fop 2.0 as dependant on 1.6 now (even if it 
>> technically it isn't)  or stick around with 1.5 until the next major 
>> release.
>
> Thanks for your input Manuel, that makes sense. I guess I’ll advertise
> FOP to be dependent on 1.6 then.
>

+1

Thanks,

Chris

>
>> Cheers
>>
>> Manuel
>
> Vincent
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Vincent Hennebert [mailto:vhennebert@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Wednesday, 23 July 2014 5:16 PM
>> To: general@xmlgraphics.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: Releasing XGC, Batik and FOP
>>
>> Hi Chris,
>>
>> On 23/07/14 10:06, Chris Bowditch wrote:
>>> Hi Vincent,
>>>
>>> On 17/07/2014 12:59, Vincent Hennebert wrote:
>>>> Hi All,
>>>>
>>>> (Moving to general@ as not only FOP is involved.)
>>>>
>>>> I should be able to spare some cycles over the next few weeks to do a
>>>> release of XGC, Batik and FOP. The new versions would be:
>>>> • XGC 1.6
>>>> • Batik 1.8
>>>> • FOP 2.0
>>>>
>>>> The minimum supported JRE for all projects would be 1.5.
>>>
>>> I thought in previous discussions the PMC approved the upgrade to Java
>>> 6? I'm not sure if anyone has committed any 1.6 specific changes
>>> between now and then, but if they have then a final release based on 
>>> 1.5 won't be possible.
>>
>> Yes, it’s agreed that 1.6 features can now be introduced to trunk. 
>> But IIC that hasn’t happened yet. So if I am able to build the 
>> release with a 1.5 JDK, I might as well do so. Otherwise we’ll just 
>> increase the minimum requirement in the release announcement.
>>
>>
>>>> Here’s my view: Branches would be created from the trunks as of now
>>>> + whatever has been committed at the time they are created. That
>>>> + means
>>>> that no existing issue would be required to be solved first (and that
>>>> all of the open FOP issues currently rated as blocker and critical
>>>> can be downgraded to major).
>>>>
>>>> If anybody thinks that some issues/features ought to be
>>>> fixed/integrated in one of the projects before the releases, please
>>>> mention it now so that we can discuss it. At any rate I won’t start
>>>> anything before Wed 30th July.
>>>
>>> Which version of pdfbox will users of font merging feature or
>>> pdf-plugin be expected to use? My understanding is that its a 2.0
>>> snapshot currently, so we might need to wait until PDFbox release 
>>> that version, before doing the release.
>>
>> AFAIU FOP only depends on FontBox 1.8.5, so it can be released now. 
>> If users want to use the PDF Images plug-in, then that’s another story.
>> They would have to use a snapshot version of FontBox instead, as well 
>> as the plug-in for that matter.
>>
>> But since that plug-in has never been released, and is not documented 
>> on the website, I doubt that there are many people outside of the 
>> core developer group who are using it.
>>
>> FOP doesn’t depend on the plug-in to deliver its core functionality 
>> anyway, so it can be released independently.
>>
>> We could (should) talk about creating a release and a website for the 
>> plug-in. If the code before the FontMerging change still is 
>> compatible with FOP’s current trunk, then it would have only released 
>> dependencies and we could deliver a version that would remain 
>> compatible with FOP 2.0. But I’m not sure I’ll have the time to do 
>> all the checks and the work.
>>
>>
>> Vincent
>>
>>
>>>> Any comment, suggestion?
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Vincent
>>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Chris
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@xmlgraphics.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@xmlgraphics.apache.org
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@xmlgraphics.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@xmlgraphics.apache.org
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@xmlgraphics.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@xmlgraphics.apache.org
>
>
>


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


Mime
View raw message