Glen,
We can do it this way. But on second thought, I think
it would be better for Renaud to move it in as
AWTRenderer, and slowly start factoring out more and
more while things are getting settled. BTW, this will
take some time to do anyway--it isn't easy because the
renderers are so
Renaud Richardet wrote:
Your note sounded hard to me. My apologies to you and the
other members of the team. In the future i'll use standard
English. Please do not take my writing style as a sign of
misrespect, as this was NOT my intention. This style is
pretty well accepted in
On Feb 23, 2005, at 7:28 AM, Victor Mote wrote:
Renaud Richardet wrote:
Your note sounded hard to me. My apologies to you and the
other members of the team. In the future i'll use standard
English. Please do not take my writing style as a sign of
misrespect, as this was NOT my intention. This
--- The Web Maestro [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
One thing I know for certain, is that it would be
great if we could all
get together for a beer (root beer or ginger ale is
acceptable for
those trying to cut down!)
I know...sad thing is, you're the closest committer to
me and California is
On Feb 23, 2005, at 3:51 PM, Glen Mazza wrote:
I know...sad thing is, you're the closest committer to
me and California is thousands of miles away! (We can
meet halfway though...perhaps Pittsburgh would be
good... ;)
Glen
With my luck, we'd still be on opposite sides of the continent! Would
that
Jeremias Maerki wrote:
snip/
So here are the proposed changes:
- Package org.apache.fop.render.awt becomes org.apache.fop.render.java2d
- AWTRenderer.java becomes Java2DRenderer.java (AWT*.java -
Java2D*.java)
I think the viewer subpackage can stay as is under the renamed package.
Any objections?
Jeremias Maerki schrieb:
Now that we've got someone who will work on the AWT Renderer I'd like to
know if someone is against renaming the AWT Renderer to Java2D Renderer.
[..]
Any objections?
Not at all.
Christian
On Feb 21, 2005, at 11:03 PM, Jeremias Maerki wrote:
So here are the proposed changes:
- Package org.apache.fop.render.awt becomes
org.apache.fop.render.java2d
- AWTRenderer.java becomes Java2DRenderer.java (AWT*.java -
Java2D*.java)
I think the viewer subpackage can stay as is under the renamed
--- Jeremias Maerki [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Now that we've got someone who will work on the AWT
Renderer I'd like to
know if someone is against renaming the AWT Renderer
to Java2D Renderer.
AWT Renderer has a rich history within FOP, it's a
popular renderer, and I have not heard of any
On Feb 22, 2005, at 8:16 AM, Glen Mazza wrote:
--- Jeremias Maerki [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Now that we've got someone who will work on the AWT
Renderer I'd like to
know if someone is against renaming the AWT Renderer
to Java2D Renderer.
AWT Renderer has a rich history within FOP, it's a
popular
On 22.02.2005 17:16:56 Glen Mazza wrote:
snip/
Now, if you want to create a Java2DRenderer as a
abstract base class for Renderers utilizing
it--AWTRenderer, AWTPrintRenderer, SVGRenderer,
TIFFRenderer, etc., that would appear to make a lot
more sense. Consider that before you tie
--- Jeremias Maerki [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A veto would have been easier. :-) I would simply
have stopped and said:
Sigh. Again. Ok, next task.
Yes, but the change proposed simply doesn't rise to
the level of a veto.
Would it be more interesting/agreeable if we would
leave the
Deal. It seems like we want the same things but didn't understand each
other. I hope we do now.
I've documented all this in a Wiki page:
http://wiki.apache.org/xmlgraphics-fop/FopAndJava2D
You said that we name our renderer on the final output the user sees.
So I also added a print and bitmap
--- Jeremias Maerki [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Deal. It seems like we want the same things but
didn't understand each
other. I hope we do now.
I've documented all this in a Wiki page:
http://wiki.apache.org/xmlgraphics-fop/FopAndJava2D
Looks good! Now whether you wish to do this before
Glen Mazza [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Looks good! Now whether you wish to do this before or
after Renaud moves the logic over is up to you two.
There's advantages/disadvantages to either method.
yes, that looks good!
Jeremias, if it's ok for the team, i would apreciate if you would do
the
Given the new layout I don't even need to prepare anything. It would
only complicate things. Just rename the AWTRenderer to Java2DRenderer,
move it to the new location, then create an empty subclass of
Java2DRenderer called AWTRenderer and move any AWT-dependant code to
that subclass.
On
We can do it this way. But on second thought, I think
it would be better for Renaud to move it in as
AWTRenderer, and slowly start factoring out more and
more while things are getting settled. BTW, this will
take some time to do anyway--it isn't easy because the
renderers are so different
Now that we've got someone who will work on the AWT Renderer I'd like to
know if someone is against renaming the AWT Renderer to Java2D Renderer.
The API in use is actually the Java2D API [1], although most of the
classes had their origin within AWT (and are still in there). AWT is
actually
18 matches
Mail list logo
