Hi Eric,
This site is not maintained by FOP team and appears to be out of date.
Currently, the only way to get an up-to-date javadocs is to make it
yourself: see [1].
[1] http://xmlgraphics.apache.org/fop/trunk/compiling.html#build-script
or http://xmlgraphics.apache.org/fop/0.95/compiling.html#bu
Any committer is allowed to create a development branch, preferably with
some advance warning. The thing is: the ASF doesn't give away commit
rights just upon request. Committership has to be earned by regular
contributions. See: http://www.apache.org/foundation/how-it-works.html
What we can do fo
Glenn,
not sure how that came to be. Well, Area defines various features that
probably won't be used for Page/PageViewport. But if it helps, we can
surely revisit that.
On 07.07.2010 07:16:54 Glenn Adams wrote:
> Is there a good/strong reason why PageViewport and Page are defined as
> subclasses
understood; thanks for the process info;
On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 5:41 PM, Jeremias Maerki wrote:
> Any committer is allowed to create a development branch, preferably with
> some advance warning. The thing is: the ASF doesn't give away commit
> rights just upon request. Committership has to be ear
Hi,
what was that boolean supposed to do, given that it’s set to false by
default, never set to true and results into dead code in renderSpace and
renderText?
Thanks,
Vincent
Vincent,
that's from when I implemented the IF format. I experimented to get the
word and letter spaces right. Obviously, that's a left-over by mistake that
can be removed now.
On 07.07.2010 13:38:40 Vincent Hennebert wrote:
> Hi,
>
> what was that boolean supposed to do, given that it’s set to
Last I attempted to build the Trunk I got a ton of warnings, including
the "Serializable class without serialVersionUID", "The field __ is
never read locally", and "Dead code"..
It seems whomever is putting in such code is either using a different
compiler, is ignoring the warnings, or has the war
On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 12:07, Christopher R. Maden wrote:
> Tom Browder wrote:
>> 1. Is this a fop bug?
...
> Your FO markup is almost certainly requesting the symbol you see. FOP
> does not make up list markers on its own; it uses the requested symbol.
Thanks, Chris. The information in the t
This completes the documentation for the release. Note the following
points:
Rewrote xdocs/status.xml. Removed all references to the 0.20
versions. Removed all links to 0.94 and earlier.
xdocs/upgrading.xml is completely outdated. Do we need a new upgrading
document, or shall we delete it?
faq i