Re: [2007/02/11] fop.bat needs patching
I do not believe that most Windows machines came with a JavaScript interpreter. As such, expecting a user to have to install one in order to use FOP is an unnecessarily high bar. However, if the 'cmd' language and the 'bat' languages are fairly identical, feel free to change them. As long as the user doesn't have to install a program just to use FOP, I don't see a problem. Simon Pepping @ Home wrote: On Wed, Mar 07, 2007 at 04:32:09PM -0800, Nicol Bolas wrote: Well, consider this. I know what a .bat file is; I know how to use one. I don't know what a cmd or a js startup script is. If I need to modify the .bat file, I can read it, understand it, and use it without looking something up online. A lot of Windows users who would be interested in FOP are in pretty much the same boat. So what would be gained from using a relatively obscure script format rather than a .bat file? In the past three months we have had two incidents where the startup script fop.bat lagged behind the update of a jar file. One such incident forced me to cancel 100MB of candidate release files, fix that batch file and create and upload 100MB of new candidate release files. You would not gain anything as long as we suffer the pain of maintaining the startup script in the age-old, powerless batch language designed for x86 computers in 1990. We would gain the comfort of a more powerful language, which is able to find out itself if a jar file has changed version number. In addition, the javascript file offers customizability to the users. Until someone creates a comfortable GUI for FOP, you better learn what cmd and js files are. Or at least, you learn that you can execute them by double clicking on them, just as the batch file. B.T.W. the cmd and bat file languages are the same language on recent Windows systems. It is just that the batch file does not use more powerful features of that language, in order to enable you to run the same on a Windows 98 computer. My Windows 98 system broke down quite a while ago, but there seem to be people who are kinder to it, and have kept it alive until now. Simon, who prefers to spend his time and efforts on forward looking features -- Simon Pepping home page: http://www.leverkruid.eu -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/fop.bat-needs-patching-tf3361048.html#a9387403 Sent from the FOP - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: [2007/02/11] fop.bat needs patching
JScript is one of the Windows Scripting Host languages. It has been supported since Win9x, along with vbscript. Nicol Bolas [EMAIL PROTECTED] 09/03/2007 01:19 PM Please respond to fop-dev To: fop-dev@xmlgraphics.apache.org cc: Subject:Re: [2007/02/11] fop.bat needs patching I do not believe that most Windows machines came with a JavaScript interpreter. As such, expecting a user to have to install one in order to use FOP is an unnecessarily high bar. However, if the 'cmd' language and the 'bat' languages are fairly identical, feel free to change them. As long as the user doesn't have to install a program just to use FOP, I don't see a problem. Simon Pepping @ Home wrote: On Wed, Mar 07, 2007 at 04:32:09PM -0800, Nicol Bolas wrote: Well, consider this. I know what a .bat file is; I know how to use one. I don't know what a cmd or a js startup script is. If I need to modify the .bat file, I can read it, understand it, and use it without looking something up online. A lot of Windows users who would be interested in FOP are in pretty much the same boat. So what would be gained from using a relatively obscure script format rather than a .bat file? In the past three months we have had two incidents where the startup script fop.bat lagged behind the update of a jar file. One such incident forced me to cancel 100MB of candidate release files, fix that batch file and create and upload 100MB of new candidate release files. You would not gain anything as long as we suffer the pain of maintaining the startup script in the age-old, powerless batch language designed for x86 computers in 1990. We would gain the comfort of a more powerful language, which is able to find out itself if a jar file has changed version number. In addition, the javascript file offers customizability to the users. Until someone creates a comfortable GUI for FOP, you better learn what cmd and js files are. Or at least, you learn that you can execute them by double clicking on them, just as the batch file. B.T.W. the cmd and bat file languages are the same language on recent Windows systems. It is just that the batch file does not use more powerful features of that language, in order to enable you to run the same on a Windows 98 computer. My Windows 98 system broke down quite a while ago, but there seem to be people who are kinder to it, and have kept it alive until now. Simon, who prefers to spend his time and efforts on forward looking features -- Simon Pepping home page: http://www.leverkruid.eu -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/fop.bat-needs-patching-tf3361048.html#a9387403 Sent from the FOP - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: [2007/02/11] fop.bat needs patching
Andreas L Delmelle wrote: On Mar 7, 2007, at 22:49, Simon Pepping wrote: On Wed, Mar 07, 2007 at 03:58:18PM +0100, Jeremias Maerki wrote: Grr, I actually changed it but forgot to commit. Thanks for handling it. On 07.03.2007 10:42:38 Adrian Cumiskey wrote: This is a quicky.. Our fop.bat is currently broken, someone needs to update fop.bat to reflect the recently added new xmlgraphics-commons-1.2svn.jar on the trunk. I have added this patch to the patch list (http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi? id=41778). Keep it broken, so people are going to use the cmd or js startup scripts. :-) Seriously: Is it possible/feasible/desirable to change the .bat file to use one of the cmd or js startup scripts maybe? Or promote their usage in other ways? Has their usage info already been added to the docs? Cheers, Andreas Well, consider this. I know what a .bat file is; I know how to use one. I don't know what a cmd or a js startup script is. If I need to modify the .bat file, I can read it, understand it, and use it without looking something up online. A lot of Windows users who would be interested in FOP are in pretty much the same boat. So what would be gained from using a relatively obscure script format rather than a .bat file? -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/fop.bat-needs-patching-tf3361048.html#a9366292 Sent from the FOP - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
