Jeremias Maerki wrote:
Hi Batik-Devs,
the latest changes in Batik broke both the maintenance branch and HEAD
of FOP:
http://cvs.apache.org/builds/gump/2003-05-30/xml-fop.html
http://cvs.apache.org/builds/gump/2003-05-30/xml-fop-maintenance.html
Is there any possibility to adjust the changes so th
Hi all,
I tried sending mail yesterday but I think it died somewhere.
Anyway, to answer Jeremias's question - Yes it would be possible to
keep the code
backwards compatible (by having AbstractGraphicsNode.getSensitiveBounds
return
either getBounds,getPrimitiveBounds or getGeometryBounds, b
Looks like your message simply got stuck in the moderator's queue.
On 30.05.2003 18:17:31 Thomas DeWeeese wrote:
> Jeremias Maerki wrote:
>
> >Hi Batik-Devs,
> >
> >the latest changes in Batik broke both the maintenance branch and HEAD
> >of FOP:
> >
> >http://cvs.apache.org/builds/gump/2003-05-3
> "JM" == Jeremias Maerki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
JM> However, I'm worrying about binary compatibility. At the moment we
JM> have to tell our users that they have to use the Batik-version
JM> delivered with FOP. I'd like to see Batik's API stabilize some
JM> more so people can just downloa
On 02.06.2003 14:12:43 Thomas E Deweese wrote:
> > "JM" == Jeremias Maerki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> JM> However, I'm worrying about binary compatibility. At the moment we
> JM> have to tell our users that they have to use the Batik-version
> JM> delivered with FOP. I'd like to see Bati
