+1

On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 5:07 AM, Robert Meyer <rme...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> I posted a message yesterday about getting opinions on either adding a
> dependency to fontbox to use their implementation or write our own for OTF
> CFF support. I personally think that using fontbox would be the better
> option due to:
>
> 1) Re-use of code rather than re-writing
> 2) Stability and subsequent bugfixes since the time it was released.
> 3) Will cut development time for implementing this feature.
>
> There is room for discussion about making the new dependency optional i.e.
> FOP working without the jar and only being called if a CFF font is used. At
> this stage though the dependency issue needs to be voted on. I would
> therefore like to start a vote.
>
> As a contributor, my vote will not count toward the result, therefore the
> decision is left up to the rest of you.
>
> Regards,
>
> Robert Meyer
>

Reply via email to