Chris Bowditch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 18.05.2004 12:03:33:

> This is very true, I also have the same concerns, which is why I have 
set out 
> some simple objectives that must be met before the redesign is ready for 
an 
> initial release. See here:
> 
> http://xml.apache.org/fop/design/layout.html#status-todo

One comment on the todos:

- border-collapse is both important and difficult. I am still fiddling 
with
details of the spec. I suggest ugrading the priority. Not supporting
border-collapes yields ugly output.

> We have in fact completed the first item. Once we have completed the 
other 
> tasks the redesign wont be far behind 0.20.5. Once we do a release, I 
believe 
> the project will gain some momentum.

That I agree with. May I was too pessimistic regarding the progress.
 
> I'm impressed. You must have a lot of spare time, and be a very talented 

> programmer. I would be grateful if you could help with any of the 
> tasks listed 
> above, so we can get a release of the redesign and overcome FOP's 
> current dilema.

Well, unfortunately not so much spare time, but as I said, doing it
alone really, really helps. And I very much tried to aggregate as
much spare time as possible into full dev-only days. That helps, too.
With the same background, most of you committers could have done the
same. If you look at it, most successful projects initially had
1 or 2 people at the start who did the core work, and then others
joined to make it complete. If I had joined the redesign team, FOP
wouldn't be much farther than it is now, because most of my time
would have gone to discussions, which in turn would also have taken
up other committer's time.

What I *can* offer to contribute is discussion about the FO spec or about
implementing PS oder PDF output. This is a concern that we probably share
and that needs discussion in any case. However, for actual implementation
discussions I feel a little reluctant. If my pet project becomes a product
in the future, we will have the same issues coming up here that we had 
with
the RenderX guy speaking up here recently. This is not what I want - 
though
I think what he did was perfectly ok, well-meaning and to be applauded. If
I recall correctly, the uproar was resolved, the RenderX guy got his 
deserved
apology, but the consensus was that the FOP code should be kept "clean" 
from
competitor's code or even ideas. If I remember that correctly and this 
still
stands, then I would rather not discuss algorithms here.

Have a nice day out there,

Arnd
-- 
Arnd Bei▀ner
Cappelino Informationstechnologie GmbH

Reply via email to