On Friday, November 14, 2003, at 03:48 PM, Andreas L. Delmelle wrote:
And just for the record, I should add that I _did_ succesfully build
and run
the 1.0Dev a little while ago on MacOS X.
You *could* experience difficulty, if you don't have the latest Java
1.4 SDK
already installed --a few
Glen Mazza wrote:
--- Peter B. West [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Then there is no need for us to actually construct
development
snapshots. The build process is not onerous, and it
doesn't take 12
hours to build.
I agree--and am concerned that the primary motivation
for these snapshots is Clay
-Original Message-
From: Peter B. West [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
I think you are being unnecessarily harsh here towards Clay, and Clay
has been getting a hard time from more that one source lately. Clay's
Jeez, I hope you're not referring to my alluding to any laziness on his
NOTE: some of the following may be off-topic (not to mention display my
level(s) of literacy on my sleeve), but might (hopefully)
prompt/continue discussion about how to improve FOP, its documentation,
and overall experience (for users ** potential developers).
I definitely appreciate the
-Original Message-
From: Clay Leeds [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(I wonder how many builds
I'll have to download before I realize the problem really is--or
isn't--my CLASSPATH)...
Ahem... Maestro, I _think_ you are, at the moment, downloading none at all
:s
( Snapshots only contain
-Original Message-
From: Andreas L. Delmelle [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
( Snapshots only contain the sources, and compiled versions of the library
jars AFAIK. It's a BIY kit. )
And just for the record, I should add that I _did_ succesfully build and run
the 1.0Dev a little while ago
*Great*--happy to hear you are getting CVS set up at
work. This will help both with documentation, and
later, if you desire, with coding.
Now, whatever else was being discussed w.r.t. builds
on the FOP site, etc., between you and the other
committers contributors, please continue on with
-Original Message-
From: Clay Leeds [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
hehehe.. That's what I was looking for (I _thought_ there was a link
like that!). Only problem is, I scoured the FOP Home and
Development tabs and couldn't find it. If I couldn't find it after
searching ( searching
From: Clay Leeds [EMAIL PROTECTED]
snip/
BTW, IIRC it's been discussed on the list (ad nauseam) that the official
tag name is HEAD, but frankly, I don't remember why so many terms appear
to be synonymous. Unless I'm mistaken, the site refers to HEAD using the
following other terms: Redesign
From: Chris Bowditch [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: Clay Leeds [EMAIL PROTECTED]
snip/
BTW, IIRC it's been discussed on the list (ad nauseam) that the official
tag name is HEAD, but frankly, I don't remember why so many terms appear
to be synonymous. Unless I'm mistaken, the site refers to HEAD using
The vote portion relates to standardizing on a name for the
Development Version. I would like this to be site-wide (and maybe I'm
just the guy to do it), but for now I'm only referring to changing
references on FOP/Download. (I understand it doesn't make sense to
change the tag in CVS).
-Original Message-
From: Clay Leeds [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
The vote portion relates to standardizing on a name for the
Development Version. I would like this to be site-wide (and maybe I'm
just the guy to do it), but for now I'm only referring to changing
references on
Clay Leeds wrote:
(Personally, I like FOP-1.0DR1
Hmm. I'm not sure the first release from the trunk should be an 1.0.
OTOH, TRUNK and HEAD are CVS specific terms which will probably confuse
the common FOP user. Too bad, I like HEAD.
J.Pietschmann
Victor Mote wrote:
-1 on the name. There is no such thing as FOP 1.0DR1. It is a naming
convention only, and IMO, not a good one.
Correct. What about current development version?
J.Pietschmann
Victor Mote wrote:
Clay Leeds wrote:
Perhaps it was laziness (ouch! ;-p), but I'd like to think not. I spent
10-15 minutes looking on the site to determine where I could download
the the 1.0Dev version to test with--actually, I've gone searching a
*bunch* of times, only to get frustrated and
--- Peter B. West [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Then there is no need for us to actually construct
development
snapshots. The build process is not onerous, and it
doesn't take 12
hours to build.
I agree--and am concerned that the primary motivation
for these snapshots is Clay simply not
-Original Message-
From: Clay Leeds [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Is it possible we could implement a system to get the CVS nightlies
(src /or bin) for fop-1.0Dev zipped and/or tar'd for simple
downloading and available from the Dev tab? Having to log in with CVS
access is kind of a
On Wednesday, November 12, 2003, at 12:51 PM, Andreas L. Delmelle
wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Clay Leeds [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Is it possible we could implement a system to get the CVS nightlies
(src /or bin) for fop-1.0Dev zipped and/or tar'd for simple
downloading and available
Clay Leeds wrote:
BTW, IIRC it's been discussed on the list (ad nauseam) that the official
tag name is HEAD, but frankly, I don't remember why so many terms
appear to be synonymous.
Yes, standardizing language in the docs makes sense. However
re-tag it in CVS?
I don't think this is appropriate
19 matches
Mail list logo
