Re: Fw: [GUMP] Build Failure - xml-fop

2003-06-02 Thread Thomas DeWeeese
Jeremias Maerki wrote: Hi Batik-Devs, the latest changes in Batik broke both the maintenance branch and HEAD of FOP: http://cvs.apache.org/builds/gump/2003-05-30/xml-fop.html http://cvs.apache.org/builds/gump/2003-05-30/xml-fop-maintenance.html Is there any possibility to adjust the changes so

Re: [GUMP] Build Failure - xml-fop

2003-06-02 Thread Jeremias Maerki
Looks like your message simply got stuck in the moderator's queue. On 30.05.2003 18:17:31 Thomas DeWeeese wrote: Jeremias Maerki wrote: Hi Batik-Devs, the latest changes in Batik broke both the maintenance branch and HEAD of FOP:

Re: [GUMP] Build Failure - xml-fop

2003-06-02 Thread Thomas E Deweese
JM == Jeremias Maerki [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: JM However, I'm worrying about binary compatibility. At the moment we JM have to tell our users that they have to use the Batik-version JM delivered with FOP. I'd like to see Batik's API stabilize some JM more so people can just download the latest