I wouldn't worry Clay, I'm not sure I really know what this thread is about
any more either. Either way, it's been merged but thanks for your support.

The fix of this regression is easy, I'll fix it in the morning.

On 4 July 2012 18:32, The Web Maestro <the.webmaes...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I'm a bit confused... Am I correct that this [VOTE] relates to merging
> the Temp_URI_Unification to fop/trunk and not to FOP-1.1rc*? If so,
> then +1 and if not then +0 since I don't quite understand... (not
> blocker, but not enough info for me to +1... ;-)
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Clay Leeds
> --
> <the.webmaes...@gmail.com> - <http://ourlil.com/>
> My religion is simple. My religion is kindness.
> - HH The 14th Dalai Lama of Tibet
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 4, 2012 at 9:26 AM, Chris Bowditch
> <bowditch_ch...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > On 04/07/2012 17:15, Glenn Adams wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> On Wed, Jul 4, 2012 at 9:25 AM, mehdi houshmand <med1...@gmail.com
> >> <mailto:med1...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> >>
> >>     On 4 July 2012 12:32, Vincent Hennebert <vhenneb...@gmail.com
> >>     <mailto:vhenneb...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>         There does seem to be a regression. Before, the
> >>         FopFactoryConfigurator
> >>         object was getting the strict-validation element from the
> >>         config file
> >>         and calling FopFactory.setStrictValidation if it was set to
> >>         true. This
> >>         is no longer the case.
> >>
> >>         I’ve just tried to render a table with table-footer after
> >>         table-body,
> >>         and now a validation error is thrown even if I have
> >>         strict-validation
> >>         set to false in my config file. No validation error was thrown
> >>         before.
> >>
> >>
> >>     I've fixed the underlying issue but this is an interesting one; it
> >>     isn't obvious that settings from the fop conf override the
> >>     settings from the command line options. (Pete probably wrote this
> >>     part hahaha ;) )
> >>
> >>
> >> They shouldn't. Command line options should override the conf file.
> >>
> >
> > Agreed, but IIUC, the team just copied the existing functionality due to
> > time constraints. We should probably log a bug to track that as an issue.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Chris
> >
> >
>

Reply via email to