Dear Fop-Devs, since I am one of the people cited for moving forward to 1.5, I just want to throw my 2 cts in the mix:
I would prefer a new release first, and then moving to 1.5. Rationale: 1) Retroweaving works, but there will be some bugs which will have to be ironed out and tested. The last release (0.95) has been done quite a long time back, and the next release will take even longer when a new "feature" (1.5) is added. 2) Since the 0.9x releases are "test-releases" towards 1.0, they should have the same features / requirements. 3) The next release (1.0.9x ? 1.9x?) could then depend on 1.5, whereas the 1.0 branch could stay on 1.4 As an example from another apache project: Maven moved from 2.1.0 to 2.2.0 rather than 2.1.x because they now require java 1.5 and did not want to make this a "minor" upgrade" Max 2009/8/20 Simon Pepping <[email protected]>: > On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 02:14:39PM +0100, Chris Bowditch wrote: >> Jeremias Maerki wrote: >> >There we go again. ;-) I can understand the wishes and cravings of the >> >developers (feeling them myself), but as I've said before: such a >> >decision should be made with the user community in the back, i.e. there >> >should be another user survey to gather current data. Just because Sun >> >EOLs a Java version doesn't mean that everyone can suddenly just do the >> >switch. So why don't those who want this change so badly do that little >> >survey so we have the data on an informed decision? >> >> Hi All, >> >> I'm not so against this idea 1 year further on but I still have >> concerns that we would force x% of users to stay on 0.95 if we do >> this. I agree with Jeremias' proposal to run a survey on fop-users >> for a couple of weeks to get some hard facts to help make an >> informed decision. >> >> Also, I think it is something that could wait until after the long >> promised 1.0 release. With the changing IPD feature being one of the >> last major features of 0.20.x missing from 0.9x that is now >> available we should consider doing the v1.0 release and then if the >> survey shows the number of 1.4 and earlier users to be very low then >> we should do the switch. > > I agree that we should proceed with a 1.0 release. > > I can also agree with releasing it compliant with Java 1.4. > > I note, however, that the methods I removed were several methods in > class Character which are very useful in character handling, such as > the method Character.toChars(int), which is the main method to convert > an integer to an array of chars. That means that for Unicode values > above 0xFFFF there is no good method to turn the value into a char[] > or String. Also Characters.toLowerCase, toUpperCase, toTitleCase, > getType, $UnicodeBlock. For a text handling application in 2009 that > is a bit painful. > > Simon > > -- > Simon Pepping > home page: http://www.leverkruid.eu >
