"My religion is simple. My religion is kindness."
- HH The Dalai Lama of Tibet

> On Jun 20, 2014, at 5:48 AM, Chris Bowditch <bowditch_ch...@hotmail.com> 
> wrote:
> Hi Simon,
> Yes I did argue against an upgrade to 1.6 for the reasons stated at that 
> time, i.e. improved annotation support. However, nearly another year on, Java 
> 8 has been out for a while and additional reasons to upgrade emerge, i.e. 
> allow us to leverage PDFBox improvements. Therefore, I'm +1 on going to 1.6.
> However, I'm -1 on rushing to 7 or 8 for the reasons previously stated. FOP 
> is a server process who user base will expect to run on a variety of 
> different older operating systems including some mainframe systems, where 
> upgrading Java requires the installation of many o/s patches. It can be very 
> difficult to get approval to upgrade the o/s on such systems and therefore 
> make it very difficult to move to newer versions of Java on such systems. So 
> until they catch up a bit and there is a compelling reason to go to 7 or 8, I 
> say moving to 1.6 for the imminent v2.0 release is a good plan.
> BTW, I think we should keep general@ in the loop as this decision has an 
> impact on all the sub projects in XML Graphics umbrella
> Thanks,
> Chris
>> On 18/06/2014 14:20, Simon Steiner wrote:
>> Hi,
>> As part of the work on merging fonts in PDFs:
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FOP-2302
>> I am using PDFBox 2.0 instead of 1.8 since that version has switched from 
>> AWT to its own fontfile parser/renderer to give better support for different 
>> fonts.
>> This version requires Java 6 but FOP is currently supporting Java 5, does 
>> Java 5 still need to be supported?
>> Thanks

Reply via email to