Good--thanks everyone--I'll take care of this soon.
Glen
--- Jeremias Maerki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> +1
>
> On 20.11.2003 00:01:23 Glen Mazza wrote:
> > Speaking of which, any objection if I "promote"
> the
> > org.apache.fop.pdf.FontSetup to the top-level
> Fonts
> > package? It is curren
+1
On 20.11.2003 00:01:23 Glen Mazza wrote:
> Speaking of which, any objection if I "promote" the
> org.apache.fop.pdf.FontSetup to the top-level Fonts
> package? It is currently being referenced by the AWT,
> MIF, PS, RTF, and XML renderers (basically all of
> them), indicating that it's probabl
Speaking of which, any objection if I "promote" the
org.apache.fop.pdf.FontSetup to the top-level Fonts
package? It is currently being referenced by the AWT,
MIF, PS, RTF, and XML renderers (basically all of
them), indicating that it's probably better placed
there.
Here's my +1.
+1
J.Pietschma
Glen Mazza wrote:
> Speaking of which, any objection if I "promote" the
> org.apache.fop.pdf.FontSetup to the top-level Fonts
> package? It is currently being referenced by the AWT,
> MIF, PS, RTF, and XML renderers (basically all of
> them), indicating that it's probably better placed
> there.
>
