Sorry guys, I may have communicated myself poorly here. I didn't mean that
this bug should block the 1.1 release, I didn't even mean to insinuate as
such. I only meant that this behaviour is non-optimal and it would be quite
a lot of work to back-date the patch to work on 1.1 and it's better to do
that sooner rather than later.

This bug is long-standing and NOT new or recently introduced. Apologies for
any misunderstandings.

Mehdi

On 5 September 2012 14:29, Jonathan Levinson <
jonathan.levin...@intersystems.com> wrote:

> We have customers who make heavy use of FOP TIFF.  There are situations
> where TIFF generation is a requirement.
>
> Kind Regards,
> Jonathan
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Chris Bowditch [mailto:bowditch_ch...@hotmail.com]
> > Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2012 9:14 AM
> > To: fop-dev@xmlgraphics.apache.org
> > Cc: priv...@xmlgraphics.apache.org
> > Subject: 1.1 Release (was Vacation)
> >
> > On 05/09/2012 13:55, mehdi houshmand wrote:
> >
> > Hi All,
> >
> > Apart from my initial e-mail there's nothing private in this e-mail
> thread, so
> > moving the discussion to fop-dev.
> >
> > > Bugzilla#53790 applies to FOP1.1. It's a blocking point if you're
> > > working with TIFF, do you want me to create an analogous commit for
> > > 1.1? I haven't had the time to apply it, now seems like a good
> > > opportunity to ask whether I should.
> >
> > I don't believe that is a blocker to release. There are plenty of other
> > compression types that do work.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Chris
> >
>
>

Reply via email to