On Tue, Nov 22, 2005 at 10:51:40AM +0100, Jeremias Maerki wrote:
> Hi Oleg,
> I see you're still a lurker. :-)
> J#: I don't know. It looks like you need a Visual Studio .NET license
> which I don't have. Was this what nfop was done with? I didn't look.
> C#: I don't have time to help with such an endeavour in the near future.
> That's a huge task. And the Java version takes effort enough at the
> moment.
> I know people who would be very interested to run FOP on .NET but for
> the moment I'm only going to take the "easy road" via IKVM so see where
> I get. But I guess one could think about creating additional source code
> in C# or any other .NET language to provide additional features that
> might be difficult with IKVM. Since IKVM has problems with AWT it might
> make sense to write a renderer in C# to do direct printing, for example.
> But my priorities are with PDF and PS at the moment.

On a side note, an interesting way to get the AWT going on Win32 could
be to use the Qt4 peers in GNU Classpath with a Qt4 build on Win32. You
may want to see if Jeroen or someone on the IKVM list has looked that
way. I've got the Qt4 peers working with Kaffe on Linux and OS X, but
didn't have much time to play with Kaffe on Cygwin recently.

dalibor topic

> On 22.11.2005 10:27:09 Oleg Tkachenko wrote:
> > Jeremias Maerki wrote:
> > 
> > > I think having the opportunity to provide a .NET version of FOP would
> > > widen the number of potential users considerably especially since
> > > to my knowledge there's no usable open source .NET FO implementation out
> > > there. Depending on the license situation (IKVM is BSD but GNU Classpath
> > > is LGPL) we could even think about distributing .NET binaries.
> > 
> > I think that's a good move and definitely would be well accepted in the 
> > .NET community. I could help you on that.
> > And besides IKVM what do yo uthink about other options - using J# or 
> > even porting to C#?
> > -- 
> > Oleg
> Jeremias Maerki

Reply via email to