Hi Glenn,
On 24/07/2014 14:41, Glenn Adams wrote:
On Thu, Jul 24, 2014 at 6:39 AM, Chris Bowditch <[email protected]>
wrote:
Hi Glenn,
The original plan was for Robert Meyer to handle the release. I've moved
him to a different project for a while, so I then decided Vincent should be
our volunteer ;-)
However, it came to light that there is an unwritten policy that releases
can't depend on snapshots of other projects. So that's causing us a problem
for the pdf-plugin and font merging enhancement, which is one of several
key features in this release. The PMC needs to decide if a snapshot
dependency is acceptable or whether we should wait for PDFBox v2.0 to be
released.
Is there a schedule (tentative or otherwise) for releasing PDFBox 2.0?
The PDFBox board report for July 2014, says they are targeting late summer.
Thanks,
Chris
Vincent is currently looking additional bugs to fix before the release.
Can we continue this discussion on general@ please, since this affects
all projects, not just FOP
Sure.
Thanks,
Chris
On 16/07/2014 18:33, Glenn Adams wrote:
On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 11:23 AM, Vincent Hennebert <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> 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:[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>]
Sent: 16 July 2014 12:56
To: [email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>
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 <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> 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
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
