RE: [Proposal] I volunteer to help with 0.20.6

[Victor Mote]

Anton Tagunov wrote:

> Perhaps Victor and/or some other patch authors would assist.

I wish I could help you, but I am blocked from development on that branch as
well.

Victor Mote

Re: [Proposal] I volunteer to help with 0.20.6, part II

[Chris Bowditch]

Anton Tagunov wrote:
amendment:
It really is not such a nonsense as it may seem, Tomcat
3.x.y piecfully co-exist with 4 and 4 coexists with 5.
The trouble is everyone always focuses on 0.20.x to the detriment of 1.0 
development. Going for the low hanging fruit in 0.20.x may help fix a few 
minor issues but you cant escape from the fact that keep-* properties cant be 
implemented there.

To reduce mess in the cvs if this proposal is wellcomed we
could create a svn subdir, something like
fop-0-20-2-maintain.
No one said there is a mess in CVS. I dont think there is a need to create a 
separate directory. A branch is fine.

Let me repeat again: I will ask PMC not to vote for the
release if I get bogged down into anything but most
simplisting bug fixing. Just go through Bugzilla and apply
most evident and simple patches. And then ask people: has
anthing become worse since 0.20.5.
The concern with allowing development of 0.20.x is not that we introduce 
regressions or that there are large changes. Simply, that it distracts from 
the real goal of FOP: getting the few simple bits finished in 1.0 so that we 
can do a release. And we really arent that far away. I reckon a developer with 
a good knowledge of the layout code could plug the main gaps in about 3-4 
months solid work.

(What really killed me in 0.20.5 were troubles with table
rendering when cells do have a background. And awt renderer
produced pour-quality images cause it used int-based
Graphics interface not a double-based one. And I have patch
for that too. But some other patches as simple is that are
floating around, some hyphenation patch.)
Chris

Re: [Proposal] I volunteer to help with 0.20.6

[Chris Bowditch]

Anton Tagunov wrote:
Hi, gang!
I'm Anton Tagunov, a committer with Avalon and Excalibur
apache projects. I'm afraid I have not been much active
withing these projects lately, but I've still got the commit
priviliges and an active apache account.
Welcome.
I have a full understanding of current situation @fop:
0_20_2 branch has been frozen and all efforts have been
directed at reacheing 1.0 release. On the other hand there
has not been a release for quite a while. The only thing
available to users is 0.20.5. And I do know that a massive
refactoring has happened on the path to 1.0. And I do know
that 0.20.5 code is a bit messy which in the beginning
caused the refactoring.
Well, thats not the full picture. Refactoring was started because it is too 
difficult to implement keep-* properties into the maintenance code because of 
it architecture. Hence a new architecture was thought up and hey presto: work 
begins on 1.0.

However, being practicle we (I work for Deutsche Bank now)
definetely need fop NOW. We do use 0.20.5. And we do have
local patches for it. I feel these patches may be of a
certain value to others too. Also I would also like to
leverage public review available with open source. Besides
we do have at least several patches against 0.20.5 flying
around cvs.
What a small world. My company is working with Deutsche bank (London) on a 
project involving FOP. At the moment they are our only customer who still work 
 with FOP. Most of our customers must have XEP to get keep-* properties. This 
is the one area that FOP really falls down on. If FOP had keep-* properties it 
would be used much more. That is why we must focus our energies on the redesign.


The mantra of 0.20.6 would be: no new features, not much
labor, go for low-hanging fruit and fix what is easy to fix
and for what patches are already available.
That should be relatively easy. Piece of cake.
In a way I agree with you, and it looks like you will be taking on most of the 
work for yourself, and thus minimising the distraction from HEAD development. 
But I would much rather you concentrated on HEAD. Doing more development of a 
frozen architecture is only going to encourage more users for a dead code base.

On the upside FOP project which has not had releases for
quite a while while gains some more visibility and showes it
is alive. 0.20.6 announcements will be accompanied with a
big fat comment that it is just a bug-fix and the real
paradize is expected with 1.0.
1.0 isnt a real paradise, more like a 0.3. Just 0.20 plus keep-* properties. 
Well, thats the goal. In reality theres going to be some regression on 0.20.x 
functionality.

I do understand the nature of software development. I do
understnad you're at 1.0-dev. I honestly hope some day I
will find enought time and enery to dig into that. But being
practical this is what I can offer fop community right now:
assistance in 0.20.6 release. Low-hanging fruit. Light bug
fixing.
I have to say I think I'm against doing a 0.20.6. I dont like being negative 
toward someone who wants to improve the code, but I think its for the best if 
1.0 stands a chance. And I know whats it like not having much time, most of 
the other committers are in the same boat. Yet we have all made at least some 
contributions towards the 1.0 effort. I would like to see you doing the same.


Chris