Hi,
unless I'm missing something, fontbox dev activity is quite slow
(latest commit was on 2007-10-01, 6 years ago, see [1]).
IMHO, introducing a dependency on such project witch will need some
improvement is not a good thing, unless we can ensure that submitting
patches to it will be applied on
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FOP-2180?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Peter Hancock resolved FOP-2180.
Resolution: Implemented
Assignee: Peter Hancock
Thanks to Alexey Neyman
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FOP-1069?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Peter Hancock resolved FOP-1069.
Resolution: Fixed
Assignee: Peter Hancock
Resolved thanks to Robert Meyer
Hi Pascal,
FontBox is a small library within the PDFBox project. PDFBox is an
active Apache project, so getting patches committed there shouldn't be a
problem. Jeremias is a committer on PDFBox too. FontBox is no longer
hosted on Source Forge, as it was moved to Apache a few years back;
Hi,
Ok, I've missed that. I did found only the sourceforge repos, I'm sorry.
So i'm +1 too.
2013/1/10 Chris Bowditch bowditch_ch...@hotmail.com:
Hi Pascal,
FontBox is a small library within the PDFBox project. PDFBox is an active
Apache project, so getting patches committed there shouldn't
Hi Pascal,
My apologies as I should have provided the link [1]. I am guessing that the
sourceforge project you linked to is the original version before it was merged
with pdfbox.
The project is quite active and had its last patch submitted yesterday. There
is also a PMC member on the project
Ignore my last message. Chris got there first.
From: rme...@hotmail.co.uk
To: fop-dev@xmlgraphics.apache.org
Subject: RE: OTF CFF Implementation
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2013 11:01:00 +
Hi Pascal,
My apologies as I should have provided the link [1]. I am guessing that the
sourceforge project
Hi all,
I posted a message yesterday about getting opinions on either adding a
dependency to fontbox to use their implementation or write our own for OTF CFF
support. I personally think that using fontbox would be the better option due
to:
1) Re-use of code rather than re-writing
2) Stability
Hi Rob,
On 10/01/2013 12:07, Robert Meyer wrote:
Hi all,
I posted a message yesterday about getting opinions on either adding a
dependency to fontbox to use their implementation or write our own for
OTF CFF support. I personally think that using fontbox would be the
better option due to:
+1
On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 5:07 AM, Robert Meyer rme...@hotmail.co.uk wrote:
Hi all,
I posted a message yesterday about getting opinions on either adding a
dependency to fontbox to use their implementation or write our own for OTF
CFF support. I personally think that using fontbox would be
+1 from me to adding FontBox support and making it optional as Chris recommends.
FOP functionality should not change if OTF CFF Font is not requested. Of
course, there may be other Font areas where FOP can use FontBox's help, and
that'll come in the course of time.
Clay Leeds ~
+1
Vincent
On 10/01/13 13:07, Robert Meyer wrote:
Hi all,
I posted a message yesterday about getting opinions on either adding a
dependency to fontbox to use their implementation or write our own for OTF
CFF support. I personally think that using fontbox would be the better option
due
+1
2013/1/10 Robert Meyer rme...@hotmail.co.uk:
Hi all,
I posted a message yesterday about getting opinions on either adding a
dependency to fontbox to use their implementation or write our own for OTF
CFF support. I personally think that using fontbox would be the better
option due to:
+1 if usage is restricted to OTF CFF fonts at first.
On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 2:20 PM, Vincent Hennebert vhenneb...@gmail.comwrote:
+1
Vincent
On 10/01/13 13:07, Robert Meyer wrote:
Hi all,
I posted a message yesterday about getting opinions on either adding a
dependency to fontbox
+1 for it being an optional dependency.
On Jan 10, 2013 2:45 PM, Peter Hancock peter.hanc...@gmail.com wrote:
+1 if usage is restricted to OTF CFF fonts at first.
On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 2:20 PM, Vincent Hennebert
vhenneb...@gmail.comwrote:
+1
Vincent
On 10/01/13 13:07, Robert Meyer
From my limited experience posting to PDFBox, they process patches pretty
quickly and post feedback where appropriate promptly too. Dunno if that
eases your concerns Pascal, but that's my 2 cents worth
On Jan 10, 2013 11:02 AM, Robert Meyer rme...@hotmail.co.uk wrote:
Ignore my last message.
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FOP-2180?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=13549977#comment-13549977
]
Alexey Neyman commented on FOP-2180:
Thanks Peter!
Only thing is status.xml:
action
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FOP-1738?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Luis Bernardo reassigned FOP-1738:
--
Assignee: Luis Bernardo
break-before=page in table-row
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FOP-1738?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Luis Bernardo resolved FOP-1738.
Resolution: Fixed
Fix Version/s: trunk
this is not reproducible in trunk anymore. the current
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FOP-1597?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Luis Bernardo resolved FOP-1597.
Resolution: Fixed
Fix Version/s: trunk
this is not reproducible in trunk anymore. the output
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FOP-1714?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Luis Bernardo resolved FOP-1714.
Resolution: Fixed
Fix Version/s: trunk
this has been fixed in trunk for a long time; as such
21 matches
Mail list logo
