Hi, On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 3:19 PM, Martinez, Mel - 1004 - MITLL <[email protected]> wrote: > Jukka - It isn't about what I 'want' to go through.
Yeah, sorry for picking on you specifically. My point is that what you're describing is a rather high level of oversight that isn't mandatory or even desirable for the average PDFBox user. Thus while I do understand your reluctance on new dependencies (even test ones), in the bigger picture it seems to me like a rather marginal concern when balanced against the potential benefit to all PDFBox users through better test coverage. > As I said before, the committers have final say, not I. If this gets added, > then when we upgrade to that version of PDFBox, we will simply have to go > through the necessary bureaucratic hoops. Note that PDFBox 1.7 will in any case have a lot of new code and dependencies thanks to the recent integration of the preflight and xmpbox components. Anyway, if you want to avoid the extra test dependency, I suggest you look at the patch Rey's planning to submit and then submit a followup patch that modifies the new test cases to not require the mock library. That's the Apache way of resolving conflicts like these. BR, Jukka Zitting
