J.Pietschmann wrote:
Chris Bowditch wrote:
The main thing to bear in mind is that a few platforms dont support
the later versions of Java. This will mean excluding those users from
deploying FOP on their production servers and mainframes.
Well. Java 1.4 has some added goodies, in particular ne
J.Pietschmann wrote:
[..]
Acutually I doubt FOP 0.20.5 will run completely in an 1.2 environment.
The binary is compiled with 1.4.1, and I vaguely remember compiling
No, with 1.3
problems already for 0.20.4 on 1.2.
See http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=fop-dev&m=102372166019810&w=2
Christian
Chris Bowditch wrote:
The main thing to bear in mind is that a few platforms dont support the
later versions of Java. This will mean excluding those users from
deploying FOP on their production servers and mainframes.
Well. Java 1.4 has some added goodies, in particular nestable exceptions
which
Thanks for clarifying this Chris. I wasn't certain whether Glen was
referring to FOP *development* requiring Java 1.4 SDK or FOP
*deployment* requiring 1.4. It appears you are thinking he's referring
to *deployment* as well, so my thought process isn't totally off-base.
FOP requires Java 1.2.x
Glen Mazza wrote:
It's probably not *yet* time to set 1.4 as the JDK to
code against for 1.0, but it probably wouldn't be much
of a disaster if we did so either.
The main thing to bear in mind is that a few platforms dont support the
later versions of Java. This will mean excluding those users fr
I was going to ask that too...
Web Maestro Clay
On Jan 5, 2004, at 5:43 PM, John Austin wrote:
On Mon, 2004-01-05 at 21:11, Glen Mazza wrote:
It's probably not *yet* time to set 1.4 as the JDK to
code against for 1.0, but it probably wouldn't be much
of a disaster if we did so either.
Does a targ
On Mon, 2004-01-05 at 21:11, Glen Mazza wrote:
> It's probably not *yet* time to set 1.4 as the JDK to
> code against for 1.0, but it probably wouldn't be much
> of a disaster if we did so either.
Does a target-lock commitment like this require a vote ?
John Austin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
It's probably not *yet* time to set 1.4 as the JDK to
code against for 1.0, but it probably wouldn't be much
of a disaster if we did so either.
By the time 1.0 is release-ready, 90% will either be
on 1.4 or will be upgrading to 1.4 along with the
upgrade of FOP 0.20.x to 1.0. The remaining 10% ca
Chris Bowditch wrote:
Glen,
Ive just noticed that the PropertySets class uses methods on
java.util.bitset that only exist since JDK 1.4. Namely:
cardinality
nextBitSet
So you can no longer build with 1.3
Chris
Chris,
Thanks for pointing this out. I had not noticed when I was using the
functi
