On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 11:23 AM, Vincent Hennebert <vhenneb...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> On 16/07/14 17:42, Simon Steiner wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I switched fop back to fontbox 1.8, so its only the pdfplugin that uses
>> 2.0 and the user would delete 1.8 jar if copying pdfplugin to fop.
>>
>
> Thanks Simon. That’s great because that means that we can start the
> release process of FOP as soon as we are ready.
>

It would be nice to share the following info:

   - who is going to take the lead on performing the release?
   - what is a tentative schedule for release, e.g., when should last
   changes be integrated?
   - what additional integrations (if known) are planned before release?




>
> Vincent
>
>
>  Thanks
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Vincent Hennebert [mailto:vhenneb...@gmail.com]
>> Sent: 16 July 2014 12:56
>> To: fop-dev@xmlgraphics.apache.org
>> Subject: New FOP Release [was: Re: FOP Release Automation]
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On 15/07/14 16:53, Clay Leeds wrote:
>>
>>> On Jul 15, 2014, at 7:46 AM, Glenn Adams <gl...@skynav.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I suppose it depends on whether or not we need to hack perl to use the
>>>> facility. If there is any alternative that doesn't use perl, then that
>>>> would be preferable.
>>>>
>>>> Frankly, I've never been happy with the new MD based documentation,
>>>> though Clay has spent an inordinate amount of time tweaking it.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yeah... It's not my favorite either, but at least edits are pretty
>>> quick, saved to SVN and we've got a solution to incorporate javadoc, etc.
>>>
>>> In the meantime, please let me know when we're ready to update the
>>> documentation for the Release. It doesn't take me very long to go
>>> through the code to make these types of batch edits.
>>>
>> <snip/>
>>
>> Clay, your offer to help would be greatly appreciated!
>>
>> And since you’re mentioning it, maybe it’s time to think about making a
>> new release of FOP. Although now that the font merging code has been merged
>> to trunk, and introduces a dependency on FontBox 2.0.0, we would have to
>> wait that FontBox 2.0.0 is released first. Or adapt the code to keep the
>> former 1.8.5 dependency (or the newer 1.8.6 released version).
>>
>> In the meantime, can anybody think of features that should definitely be
>> implemented before the release, or bugs fixed? Remember that due to API
>> changes, that release will have to be called 2.0.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Vincent
>>
>>

Reply via email to