DO NOT REPLY [Bug 50626] O(n^2) algorithm for adding nodes
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50626 --- Comment #1 from Jeremias Maerki jerem...@apache.org 2011-01-21 03:18:34 EST --- Thank you for the patch! I guess that optimization makes sense. However, I have to reject the patch in its current state. It introduces regressions in our test suite, namely with tests around markers. Please run ant (not just ant package) so run the full test suite. You can render the subset of unit tests in your IDE by running org.apache.fop.layoutengine.LayoutEngineTestSuite with the system property -Dfop.layoutengine.starts-with=marker. Furthermore, please change your Java editor's settings so that no tabs are generated. Tabs are evil. ;-) -- Configure bugmail: https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug.
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 48334] [PATCH] xml:base
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48334 --- Comment #4 from Simon Pepping spepp...@apache.org 2011-01-21 10:05:59 EST --- The idea and your implementation look good. Some code is missing: xml:base should be listed as a valid property in PropertyList.addAttributesToList. The backward compatibility case causes some complexity, but it seems to work well. I think that the class requires a better explanation of this case: when it applies and how it is handled. Having that explanation in this bug report does not suffice. -- Configure bugmail: https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug.
Re: [VOTE] Merge FOP color branch into trunk
On 19 Jan 2011, at 11:56, Jeremias Maerki wrote: I've cleaned up the color branch, tweaked a few things and did some more testing. I'm happy with the current state, so I'm calling for a vote to merge the current FOP color branch into trunk. No detailed review done here, but from what I did see, it indeed looks good, so +1 Regards, Andreas ---
Re: [VOTE] Merge FOP color branch into trunk
No formal review but the code looks good. +1 Sent from my iPhone On Jan 19, 2011, at 2:56 AM, Jeremias Maerki d...@jeremias-maerki.ch wrote: I've cleaned up the color branch, tweaked a few things and did some more testing. I'm happy with the current state, so I'm calling for a vote to merge the current FOP color branch into trunk. https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/xmlgraphics/fop/branches/Temp_Color +1 from me, obviously. Jeremias Maerki
Re: [VOTE] Merge FOP color branch into trunk
I'm afraid I've not had time to review so +0. Cheers, Adrian. On Jan 22, 2011, at 6:04 AM, The Web Maestro the.webmaes...@gmail.com wrote: No formal review but the code looks good. +1 Sent from my iPhone On Jan 19, 2011, at 2:56 AM, Jeremias Maerki d...@jeremias-maerki.ch wrote: I've cleaned up the color branch, tweaked a few things and did some more testing. I'm happy with the current state, so I'm calling for a vote to merge the current FOP color branch into trunk. https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/xmlgraphics/fop/branches/Temp_Color +1 from me, obviously. Jeremias Maerki
