OK, I see. As you can see, I feel the pretty much way but the current ColorExt is an abomination when it comes to extending it with additional functionality. I guess, Simon can just cut the release and I'll replace ColorExt with ColorWithAlternatives (or so). I just think it's a shame to release something we know has to change drastically anyway for the next release.
On 01.07.2010 13:39:36 Peter Hancock wrote: > > Not sure I understand what you wanted to say. > I was trying to say that I felt that moving color utility code up to > XGC was generally desirable and having to reverting back was a shame. > By 'water down' I really meant reduce, which actually means the > opposite! Sorry :-) . > > On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 12:19 PM, Jeremias Maerki <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > On 01.07.2010 13:03:43 Peter Hancock wrote: > > > Hi guys, > > > > > > > But I've just thought of a better alternative: > > > > Moving (!) ColorExt back to FOP where it was and moving > > > > GrayScaleConverter to FOP solves the whole problem with minimal effort > > > > in FOP Trunk. > > > Do you intend to refactor the static ColorUtil.toCMYKGrayColor method > > > to a member of GrayScaleConverter? > > > > I planned to move the toCMYKGrayColor method back to FOP's ColorUtil > > until things are resolved. > > > > > I think this move makes sense for this release but it is a shame to > > > water down the color package in XGC. > > > > Not sure I understand what you wanted to say. > > > > > Pete > > <snip/> > > > > > > Jeremias Maerki > > Jeremias Maerki --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
