Clay Leeds wrote:
Thanks for the respectful response. I'm aware that HEAD release is
adversely affected by MAINTENANCE work (hence the "I don't want to start
a ware here, but..." :-)), however, I posted this for a few of reasons:
1) fop-dev team might discuss this in light of the possibility of
On Jan 7, 2004, at 12:07 PM, J.Pietschmann wrote:
It works for me for generating PDF for quite some time. I get NPE when
reloading a FO source in the AWT appilcation, but this maz have other
reasons, I didn't try to track it down.
As long as I can remember I got NPE when clicking the [Reload] butto
Chris Bowditch wrote:
Okay, but you said yourself that the adjustments you made to tables has
probably broken some other things, so we would need to go through a RC,
and bug fix cycle.
It works for me for generating PDF for quite some time. I get NPE when
reloading a FO source in the AWT appilcat
> -Original Message-
> From: Chris Bowditch [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
> I understand the desire to add new features like the Tif generator into
> the maintenance code. However, doing so would mean effort is distracted
> away from HEAD development. The sooner we can do a release from HE
On Jan 7, 2004, at 7:46 AM, Chris Bowditch wrote:
Clay Leeds wrote:
I don't want to start a war here, but if (& that's a big "if") we're
going to go through the hassle of doing an RC, does it make sense to
"insert" any "new" functionality into FOP, like TIF output? I
understand Oleg Tkachenko's
Clay Leeds wrote:
I don't want to start a war here, but if (& that's a big "if") we're
going to go through the hassle of doing an RC, does it make sense to
"insert" any "new" functionality into FOP, like TIF output? I understand
Oleg Tkachenko's work for TIF is complete (or nearly complete), bu
I don't want to start a war here, but if (& that's a big "if") we're
going to go through the hassle of doing an RC, does it make sense to
"insert" any "new" functionality into FOP, like TIF output? I
understand Oleg Tkachenko's work for TIF is complete (or nearly
complete), but (like many PATCH
J.Pietschmann wrote:
Well, we could release the current CVS as 0.20.5.1. The table memory
fix is probably important to many users. THere is a slo a minor fix
concerning leader expansion there.
Okay, but you said yourself that the adjustments you made to tables has
probably broken some other thing
Chris Bowditch wrote:
Thus, I just wanted to know if some sort of 0.20.6 release will be
upcoming in the future
No, no further releases are planned from the maintenance branch, and all
development is focused on CVS Head.
Well, we could release the current CVS as 0.20.5.1. The table memory
fix is p
