Glen Mazza wrote:
I'm assuming that both of you are aware that Thomas has suspended his participation in Batik[1] until he gets some clarifications to the Apache 2.0 License. Berin, is someone in the process of answering those concerns? He's been the most active committer for the past several months--so we should probably wait on Batik's status until these issues are resolved.

[1] http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=batik-users&m=108366487432766&w=2


Thanks for bringing this to my (our?) attention. It would be good to for us to find out what Thomas needs clarification on, as well.


I haven't spent much time researching current Batik issues, and--not knowing much about the issues--haven't thought fit to comment too much on the subject up 'til now.

I think we should do this in an orderly fashion--take care of Xerces first, then Xalan, then FOP will be the third project to leave the nest. When it is our turn, we'll have a vote internally on the FOP-DEV list whether to form (a) our own TLP or (b) an XML Graphics one that will assume a future union with the Batik project.

Glen

Although I like the thought of 'just do it(tm)"... it definitely makes sense to get our ducks in a row before we proceed. The litmus (for me) to move from xml.apache to xml graphics would be: will it decrease the time for FOP 1.0 to be released? If so, the let's proceed. If not, then there's no rush (IMHO).


Thanks for the clarity and the heads up, Glen. It's much appreciated.

Web Maestro Clay

Reply via email to