On 31.08.2005 10:29:07 Manuel Mall wrote: > On Wed, 31 Aug 2005 04:07 pm, Jeremias Maerki wrote: > > Like others I'm hesitant to call it 1.0 just yet. 0.9 sends the right > > signal IMO. We're not quite where we want to be but we are soon and > > people can start looking at the new package. > > > Fine, not a problem for me. > > > We don't just have features that exceed FOP 0.20.5. We also have > > points where FOP Trunk is still inferior to 0.20.5: > > - Can't cope with changing available BPD between pages in the same > > page-sequence. > > - There are probably a number of little features and bug fixes that > > weren't ported to CVS HEAD/FOP Trunk at that time. > > - Restrictions with footnotes in conjunction with multi-column > > documents. - 0.20.5 has some kind of weird border collapsing where > > FOP Trunk simply doesn't support it, yet. > > - wrap-option is not supported. > > - missing functionality with keep-with-previous on table-rows which > > 0.20.5 handles well enough. > > - leaders/rules are incomplete > > - Fewer renderers available, only PDF and PS are really usable right > > now. - stability and usability, of course. :-) > > (there may be more...) > > > > Great list and some overlap with what I cobbled together. > > > BTW, you're welcome to add your list to the release plan. I think > > it's a good idea to have this information available. > > Sure, but my point was that I would like to see a list of things the > committers agree upon as the baseline to aim for 1.0. Not a generic > list with all the problems in fop.
Sorry, I may have mixed these things a little. I mean we need lots of documentation about what FOP can do, what it can't and what it will do and approximately when. These are all little pieces in the puzzle of communicating progress and plans for FOP. > What about I start a WIKI page called something like "Release Plan for > 1.0" which initially is just a TODO list, i.e. pulling things from this > e-mail thread, from the compliance page, from the other developer WIKI > pages with the explicit aim to document what the team thinks still > needs to be done for 1.0? That's fine. I thought this could be part of the release plan and can then be propagated over to the next release plan and so on. The content would then be adjusted as we go. > Of course, this doesn't mean people cannot work on anything outside. > Just personally I like some focus at times and I think this project is > at a stage were it would benefit as well - only temporarily though as > IMO (some form of) anarchy is important to keep these open source > volunteer based projects going. I agree. > > > > On 31.08.2005 05:09:40 Manuel Mall wrote: > > > Excellent - I like the sound of it :-). > > > > > > Personally, after having now used the trunk a bit and seeing the > > > test cases, etc., I would be a bit "bolder" and go for a name like > > > "1.0 alpha" or "1.0EA" (I think that's the terminology Sun is using > > > for unstable early releases). The big disclaimers still apply of > > > course. To some extend it also depends on when we want to declare a > > > feature freeze for 1.0, aim for stability and bug removal to get to > > > a 1.0 beta and a 1.0 release. It must be pretty close as in terms > > > of features/compliance the trunk code already vastly exceeds > > > 0.20.5. I would therefore like to see the release plan extended to > > > include a "rough" definition of 1.0 even if it is only as a delta > > > to what we have now, e.g. something like this (Note is only an > > > incomplete random example!!): > > > > > > border-collapse="collapse" => 1.0 > > > table-layout="auto" => post 1.0 > > > fix/complete support for "fo:leader" => 1.0 > > > writing-mode="rl-tb" => 1.0 > > > writing-mode="tb-rl" => post 1.0 > > > BIDI support => post 1.0 > > > full support for font-family => 1.0 > > > > > > I hope that having something like this would help to focus and > > > prioritize the work being done. > > > > > > Manuel > > > > > > On Wed, 31 Aug 2005 04:07 am, Jeremias Maerki wrote: > > > > The subject says it all: > > > > http://wiki.apache.org/xmlgraphics-fop/ReleasePlanFirstPR > > > > > > > > This is open for discussion. I'd really love to get the first > > > > release out by the end of September. > > > > > > > > Jeremias Maerki > > > > Jeremias Maerki > > Manuel Jeremias Maerki