Hi,
My actual opinion is not politically correct, so I’ll try to stick to
constructive comments.
Jeremias Maerki wrote:
On a serious note (as opposed to my outburst on fop-users), I think we
should really discuss the FOP release plan which we haven't updated in a
while. I would hate to see FOP
On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 5:11 AM, Vincent Hennebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Moreover, it can only puzzle users I think. We've used <1.0 version
> numbers for all those years, we've started a whole series of 0.9x
> releases, and all of a sudden we jump to >2.0?! With no significant
> changes fr
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41942
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Confi
1.0 sounds fine to me, 2.009 seems like a bit of a jump from 0.95 :).
Adrian.
The Web Maestro wrote:
On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 5:11 AM, Vincent Hennebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Moreover, it can only puzzle users I think. We've used <1.0 version
numbers for all those years, we've started a w
Il giorno 19/nov/08, alle ore 09:37, Jeremias Maerki ha scritto:
How about calling the next version 2.009 (to be released in early
2009).
You may choose to compose a strange number like Knuth is doing with $
\pi$ for \TeX versioning. What about $\sqrt{2}$? :P
Sorry to mingle into this, but even if releasing a 1.0 is important (and
IMHO it should be done with current crop as it is recognized as stable for
it), a more important thing would be to update the empty space that appears
on the "future"...
I do believe that most current users and prospective us
On 20 Nov 2008, at 17:29, Dario Laera wrote:
Il giorno 19/nov/08, alle ore 09:37, Jeremias Maerki ha scritto:
How about calling the next version 2.009 (to be released in early
2009).
You may choose to compose a strange number like Knuth is doing with $
\pi$ for \TeX versioning. What about
Come on, guys, this is a serious topic.
Andreas Delmelle wrote:
On 20 Nov 2008, at 17:29, Dario Laera wrote:
Il giorno 19/nov/08, alle ore 09:37, Jeremias Maerki ha scritto:
How about calling the next version 2.009 (to be released in early
2009).
You may choose to compose a strange number
On 20 Nov 2008, at 18:55, Vincent Hennebert wrote:
Come on, guys, this is a serious topic.
Oops... I'd better withdraw from the discussion, then. ;-)
BTW: 'FOP phi' (golden ratio) does have a nice ring to it.
Cheers
Andreas
Andreas Delmelle wrote:
On 20 Nov 2008, at 18:55, Vincent Hennebert wrote:
Come on, guys, this is a serious topic.
Oops... I'd better withdraw from the discussion, then. ;-)
Wait! I come with you.
BTW: 'FOP phi' (golden ratio) does have a nice ring to it.
Indeed. But insofar as it will
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46251
Summary: space-end on throws off formatting in pdf
Product: Fop
Version: 0.95
Platform: PC
OS/Version: Windows XP
Status: NEW
Severity: minor
Priority: P2
Luis,
feedback from users is very welcome. Always. So no need to apologize.
If you want to know what we're working on (long-term), take a look at
http://wiki.apache.org/xmlgraphics-fop/RoadMap. Some of us note our
priorities there. Of course, there are always smaller short-term tasks
(bugs and n
Thanx ;)
I do believe that the plan called for a 3 months of beta before making
it version 1...
The last release was 0.95... in August... and not beta...
So, my only question is... if this release isn't version 1, then, what
is missing that you all feel it should be included/corrected? (that
On 21.11.2008 02:46:55 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Thanx ;)
>
> I do believe that the plan called for a 3 months of beta before making
> it version 1...
Although that turned out to be 6 months last time.
> The last release was 0.95... in August... and not beta...
>
> So, my only question is...
14 matches
Mail list logo
