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: New FOP Release [was: Re: FOP Release Automation]
Date Thu, 24 Jul 2014 15:08:20 GMT
Hi Glenn,

On 24/07/2014 14:41, Glenn Adams wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 24, 2014 at 6:39 AM, Chris Bowditch <bowditch_chris@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Glenn,
>>
>> The original plan was for Robert Meyer to handle the release. I've moved
>> him to a different project for a while, so I then decided Vincent should be
>> our volunteer ;-)
>>
>> However, it came to light that there is an unwritten policy that releases
>> can't depend on snapshots of other projects. So that's causing us a problem
>> for the pdf-plugin and font merging enhancement, which is one of several
>> key features in this release. The PMC needs to decide if a snapshot
>> dependency is acceptable or whether we should wait for PDFBox v2.0 to be
>> released.
>>
> Is there a schedule (tentative or otherwise) for releasing PDFBox 2.0?

The PDFBox board report for July 2014, says they are targeting late summer.

Thanks,

Chris
>
>
>> Vincent is currently looking additional bugs to fix before the release.
>> Can we continue this discussion on general@ please, since this affects
>> all projects, not just FOP
>>
> Sure.
>
>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Chris
>>
>> On 16/07/2014 18:33, Glenn Adams wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 11:23 AM, Vincent Hennebert <vhennebert@gmail.com
>>> <mailto:vhennebert@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>>      On 16/07/14 17:42, Simon Steiner wrote:
>>>
>>>          Hi,
>>>
>>>          I switched fop back to fontbox 1.8, so its only the pdfplugin
>>>          that uses 2.0 and the user would delete 1.8 jar if copying
>>>          pdfplugin to fop.
>>>
>>>
>>>      Thanks Simon. That’s great because that means that we can start the
>>>      release process of FOP as soon as we are ready.
>>>
>>>
>>> It would be nice to share the following info:
>>>
>>>    * who is going to take the lead on performing the release?
>>>    * what is a tentative schedule for release, e.g., when should last
>>>      changes be integrated?
>>>    * what additional integrations (if known) are planned before release?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>      Vincent
>>>
>>>
>>>          Thanks
>>>
>>>          -----Original Message-----
>>>          From: Vincent Hennebert [mailto:vhennebert@gmail.com
>>>          <mailto:vhennebert@gmail.com>]
>>>          Sent: 16 July 2014 12:56
>>>          To: fop-dev@xmlgraphics.apache.org
>>>          <mailto:fop-dev@xmlgraphics.apache.org>
>>>          Subject: New FOP Release [was: Re: FOP Release Automation]
>>>
>>>          Hi,
>>>
>>>          On 15/07/14 16:53, Clay Leeds wrote:
>>>
>>>              On Jul 15, 2014, at 7:46 AM, Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com
>>>              <mailto:glenn@skynav.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>>                  I suppose it depends on whether or not we need to hack
>>>                  perl to use the facility. If there is any alternative
>>>                  that doesn't use perl, then that would be preferable.
>>>
>>>                  Frankly, I've never been happy with the new MD based
>>>                  documentation, though Clay has spent an inordinate
>>>                  amount of time tweaking it.
>>>
>>>
>>>              Yeah... It's not my favorite either, but at least edits
>>>              are pretty quick, saved to SVN and we've got a solution to
>>>              incorporate javadoc, etc.
>>>
>>>              In the meantime, please let me know when we're ready to
>>>              update the
>>>              documentation for the Release. It doesn't take me very
>>>              long to go
>>>              through the code to make these types of batch edits.
>>>
>>>          <snip/>
>>>
>>>          Clay, your offer to help would be greatly appreciated!
>>>
>>>          And since you’re mentioning it, maybe it’s time to think about
>>>          making a new release of FOP. Although now that the font
>>>          merging code has been merged to trunk, and introduces a
>>>          dependency on FontBox 2.0.0, we would have to wait that
>>>          FontBox 2.0.0 is released first. Or adapt the code to keep the
>>>          former 1.8.5 dependency (or the newer 1.8.6 released version).
>>>
>>>          In the meantime, can anybody think of features that should
>>>          definitely be implemented before the release, or bugs fixed?
>>>          Remember that due to API changes, that release will have to be
>>>          called 2.0.
>>>
>>>          Thanks,
>>>          Vincent
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> 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