Hi,
I've some issues with my build enviroment, the signing doesn't work, and
I don't have any why. It worked fine the other day when building 2.0.29.
I've to investigate first and therefore postpone the release for another
day.
Andreas
Am 06.07.23 um 19:56 schrieb Andreas Lehmkühler:
+1 for next monday
Tilman
On 06.07.2023 19:56, Andreas Lehmkühler wrote:
Hi,
now that the 2.0.29 is out I'd like to cut the first beta of 3.0.0.
How about next Monday? Or is there anything we have to do first and
maybe wait another week or two?
WDYT?
Andreas
Hi,
now that the 2.0.29 is out I'd like to cut the first beta of 3.0.0.
How about next Monday? Or is there anything we have to do first and
maybe wait another week or two?
WDYT?
Andreas
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail:
Hi,
I'm not sure that I understand your proposal. Even if we provide a Loader class
in 2.0 it won't be compatible on a binary level as there are many other changes.
The idea to use PDFBox 3.0.0 in environments where other dependencies are
compiled against 2.0.x won't work. Or do I miss
Hi,
I’ve one point which is not per se related to the 3.0 beta release, but which
should be considered:
The 3.0 release changed some APIs in a source and binary incompatible way. E.g
instead of using the PDDocument.load() method you now use the Loader class etc.
It would be extremely helpful
Hi,
I'm planning to cut our first beta release of 3.0.0. Be aware that the api is
supposed to be stable after the release.
Are there any objections? Are there any tickets which should be solved before?
Andreas
-
To
