Re: Thanks Jeremias

2004-03-03 Thread Chris Bowditch
Peter B. West wrote: Thanks again, Jeremias, for all of the licensing housekeeping. I'm sorry I didn't get around to giving you a hand with this. Does anything (apart from the hyphenation mess) remain to be done? Peter I would also like to thank Jeremias for sorting out the licensing, not

Re: Cocoon appears to be switching to 1.4

2004-03-03 Thread Chris Bowditch
Glen Mazza wrote: They're currently voting on the Cocoon side[1] to set 1.4 as the minimum JDK for their next 2.2 release. So far it looks good for approval. I'm not so sure it does, look at the 3rd mail in the thread: http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=xml-cocoon-devm=107813002510299w=2 and this

Re: Cocoon appears to be switching to 1.4

2004-03-03 Thread Bertrand Delacretaz
Le Mercredi, 3 mars 2004, à 10:27 Europe/Zurich, Chris Bowditch a écrit : Glen Mazza wrote: They're currently voting on the Cocoon side[1] to set 1.4 as the minimum JDK for their next 2.2 release. So far it looks good for approval. I'm not so sure it does, look at the 3rd mail in the thread:

Re: Thanks Jeremias

2004-03-03 Thread Glen Mazza
HOORAY :) --- Chris Bowditch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I would also like to thank Jeremias for sorting out the licensing, not the nicest of jobs, so three cheers for Jeremias, hip hip :-) Chris

Notify about using the e-mail account.

2004-03-03 Thread noreply
Dear user, the management of Apache.org mailing system wants to let you know that, Your e-mail account will be disabled because of improper using in next three days, if you are still wishing to use it, please, resign your account information. Please, read the attach for further

Re: Cocoon appears to be switching to 1.4

2004-03-03 Thread Clay Leeds
On Mar 3, 2004, at 1:39 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote: Le Mercredi, 3 mars 2004, à 10:27 Europe/Zurich, Chris Bowditch a écrit : Glen Mazza wrote: They're currently voting on the Cocoon side[1] to set 1.4 as the minimum JDK for their next 2.2 release. So far it looks good for approval. I'm not

fop minimum requirements

2004-03-03 Thread Clay Leeds
FOP's minimum requirements[1]: System Requirements The following software must be installed: Java 1.2.x or later Runtime Environment. FOP. The FOP distribution includes all libraries that you will need to run a basic FOP installation. These can be found in the xml-fop/lib directory.

Re: Thanks Jeremias

2004-03-03 Thread Jeremias Maerki
You guys are welcome. Thanks for the cheering. So what's left? Basically your special branch if you haven't converted everything, yet (I didn't check). It's probably ok to leave the maintenance branch in the fridge. And I guess I can give the hyphenation stuff a few minutes on Friday. One thing,

Re: fop minimum requirements

2004-03-03 Thread J.Pietschmann
Clay Leeds wrote: p.s. On second thought, maybe that'll be something I'll figure out myself (although it would be better if the legwork were already done! :-D) I don't have intentions to install a 1.2 on my smallish and almost full HD. There were, however, *zero* complaints about problems running

Re: fop minimum requirements

2004-03-03 Thread Clay Leeds
On Mar 3, 2004, at 1:23 PM, J.Pietschmann wrote: Clay Leeds wrote: p.s. On second thought, maybe that'll be something I'll figure out myself (although it would be better if the legwork were already done! :-D) I don't have intentions to install a 1.2 on my smallish and almost full HD. There were,

Re: fop minimum requirements

2004-03-03 Thread J.Pietschmann
Clay Leeds wrote: ...but what you're saying, is that there should not be problems for *binary* versions--only if users want to build from src themselves under 1.2. Well, no problems reported doesn't mean no problems. There may be well hidden problems in rarely used functionality, and people

fop-dev used to spread virus

2004-03-03 Thread Manuel Mall
The e-mail to fop-dev below which I received last night contained the Beagle virus and according to the SMTP headers it was distributed via the Apache mail server. This seems to indicate that a) The Apache list server has no virus scanner. b) As the fop-dev list is by subscription only that a

Re: fop-dev used to spread virus

2004-03-03 Thread Glen Mazza
Thanks, Manuel. We have about 430 people on FOP-DEV, last time we checked, so it would be hard to find the problem account. Still, sending to infrastructure... (well, I believe it's called infrastructure @ apache dot org, I'll be corrected soon otherwise... ) Glen --- Manuel Mall [EMAIL

fop.xconf

2004-03-03 Thread Peter B. West
Fops, What's the intention for fop.xconf? Is it to be processed by the user agent? What about user configuration? Have these things been decided yet? Peter -- Peter B. West http://www.powerup.com.au/~pbwest/resume.html

namespace-prefixes

2004-03-03 Thread Peter B. West
Fops, In HEAD, ///apps/FOFileHAndler.java contains the following: protected static XMLReader createParser() throws FOPException { try { SAXParserFactory factory = SAXParserFactory.newInstance(); factory.setNamespaceAware(true); factory.setFeature(

Re: namespace-prefixes

2004-03-03 Thread Glen Mazza
--- Peter B. West [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In HEAD, ///apps/FOFileHAndler.java contains the following: factory.setFeature( http://xml.org/sax/features/namespace-prefixes;, true); snip/ That is, I would turn allow the namespace-prefixes feature to remain in

Re: fop.xconf

2004-03-03 Thread Glen Mazza
I haven't looked at it--but this was before my time on the project, fop.xconf hasn't been altered since December 2002. It appears to be related to Avalonization of FOP. For the benefit of other relative newcomers, it is located here: http://cvs.apache.org/viewcvs.cgi/xml-fop/conf/fop.xconf And