I don't know what you're talking about but it sounds like you don't know
what you're talking about.
AFAIK maven is a tool.  I have yet to see a source package reference
maven in build dependancies.
Ant is a dependancies.  If I don't specifically have ant in the Build
Path I can't compile FOP.  I get 55 errors on version 1.0.
Ant is open source or there wouldn't be this discussion.  I downloaded
the source to FOP to compile my own jar, initially because the compiled
jar offered didn't work because it included a classpath in the manifest
and I'm using it with other software which has it's own classpath
To compile FOP I added all the classes it needed in the build path (gets
errors without them).  I downloaded them as source if they made the
source available and for one or two old jars I couldn't find a source I
grabbed a compiled jar.  Ant has source you can download.  It is open
source.  Don't speak for the open source community.
Your response has nothing to do with the question (why the circular
reference?).  The discussion didn't need your two cents.

-----Original Message-----
From: Benson Margulies [mailto:bimargul...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2011 2:47 PM
To: fop-dev@xmlgraphics.apache.org
Subject: Re: Which came first, the chicken or the egg?

> I assume either the FOP developers know why there's a circular 
> reference and have the resolution or they just use the compiled jars 
> and ignore the issue.

Just about the entire open source community disagrees with you.
Everyone treats ant, maven, and (for that matter) gcc as opaque
packages, not as source dependencies. It's a tool.

Reply via email to