On 21.08.2005 22:45:12 J.Pietschmann wrote: > Jeremias Maerki wrote: > > We've already broken API compatibility so changing packages (I'm > > thinking think about org.apach.fop, removing "apps") shouldn't be a big > > deal before the first release. > > I guess people would be more upset about FOPException moving > to a new package than any other API change. It might be worth > a try though.
Uh, yeah, that one. That's a design task by itself. Any takers for a good exception strategy for FOP and XML Graphics Commons????? I'm not the brightest when it comes to exceptions. > > On the other side, maybe we should really take the time to write up a > > short specification for the API and to have that voted on. > > What's wrong with the spec in the Wiki? You mean specificationS (plural), right? Nothing really, except that today's reality looks different and the API discussion from two years ago is not finished. Anyway, my proposal from back then is now implemented as my API abstraction with a few little changes. If I had the naming problem behind me and the stuff published we could simply take that and be done with it. Damn, I'll clean this up first thing tomorrow morning. Should have done it today. Jeremias Maerki
