I created a branch where I placed the changes I implemented to break the
cyclic dependencies. Once the migration to Junit is completed I can
merge/redo the work to trunk. Attached is a diagram that shows the
dependencies between modules in the new branch. The diagram is generated
by a script, and the *.pom.template files can also be generated.
Regarding the manifest (*.mf) files, my preference would be to get rid
of them and generate them as part of the ant task that builds the jars.
I already started doing that.
On 12/22/14 5:21 PM, Glenn Adams wrote:
To be somewhat more precise, I am migrating all of
test-{resources,sources} to test/{java,resources} as I progress on the
junit upgrade. Once that is complete, I expect to also move
sources/org to src/java/org and sources/*.{mf,template} to an
appropriate location.
On Mon, Dec 22, 2014 at 10:03 AM, Luis Bernardo
<lmpmberna...@gmail.com <mailto:lmpmberna...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Yes, I can see that if you started the Junit migration then moving
so many classes will be a problem. I will instead merge some of
the jars.
On 12/22/14 4:48 PM, Glenn Adams wrote:
the junit work involves pretty much all classes, so indeed it
would cause a big problem to integrate
On Mon, Dec 22, 2014 at 3:06 AM, Luis Bernardo
<lmpmberna...@gmail.com <mailto:lmpmberna...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Glenn, regarding BATIK-1098, which has to do with cyclic
dependencies between jars, the approach I followed was to
move classes between packages to break the dependencies (the
other approach would be to cut on the number of batik jars,
which are indeed too many, and merge some of them). This
involved moving a lot of classes in the packages with
dom.svg, bridge, anim, script and gvt in the name. But I am
afraid now that this may cause major problems with your work
when you try to merge to trunk...
What are the batik packages where you are doing your work?
On 12/22/14 9:28 AM, Luis Bernardo wrote:
OK, since the goal is really to release FOP 2.0 then I will
not cut a RC now. But I will fix BATIK-1098.
On 12/21/14 11:57 PM, Glenn Adams wrote:
There are two items underway that I'd like to be finished
before we cut a release:
* BATIK-1092
<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BATIK-1092>
* BATIK-1095
<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BATIK-1095>
* FOP-2391 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FOP-2391>
At a minimum, the Batik work involved in the last one of
these needs to be finished before we do an FOP 2.0.
On Sun, Dec 21, 2014 at 4:40 PM, Luis Bernardo
<lmpmberna...@gmail.com <mailto:lmpmberna...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Hi everyone,
I am planning to push for a Batik release in the coming
weeks so that we can aim to also have a release of FOP
in the near future. The recent release of XGC was part
of this goal.
I am currently working on BATIK-1098 which I think
needs to be fixed before a release can be considered.
After that I plan to build a release candidate and give
users some weeks to test before building the final
release. Since I do not see any reason to bump the
major version I plan to name the release 1.8.
In terms of new features the only thing really new
compared with 1.7 will be the SVG1.2 color support
added by Jeremias. All the rest are bug fixes.
Let me know if you have any
comments/suggestions/objections.
Luis
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail:
batik-dev-unsubscr...@xmlgraphics.apache.org
<mailto:batik-dev-unsubscr...@xmlgraphics.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail:
batik-dev-h...@xmlgraphics.apache.org
<mailto:batik-dev-h...@xmlgraphics.apache.org>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: batik-dev-unsubscr...@xmlgraphics.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: batik-dev-h...@xmlgraphics.apache.org