You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@pdfbox.apache.org by Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com> on 2008/08/05 14:19:30 UTC
Next PDFBox release
Hi,
With all the source code in svn, we can start thinking about making a
new release. There are already a number of post-0.7.3 fixes and
improvements in the codebase, so I would target for a release as soon
as we've reviewed the release contents in relation to Apache policies.
I've tentatively added a 0.8.0-incubator release tag in the issue
tracker. I think it makes sense to upgrade the minor version number to
reflect the move to Apache.
I'm not sure if we should yet rename the packages from org.pdfbox to
org.apache.pdfbox. We could for example do the 0.8.0 release with the
current package names, and perhaps do the rename in a 1.0.0 release.
BR,
Jukka Zitting
Re: Next PDFBox release
Posted by Daniel Wilson <wi...@gmail.com>.
>>I would do the package rename as soon as possible.
Yes, the sooner the pain is over, the better, IMO.
Daniel
On 8/5/08, Jeremias Maerki <de...@jeremias-maerki.ch> wrote:
>
> Thanks a lot for handling the source import and related tasks, Jukka!
> I'll look after the website later this week.
>
>
> On 05.08.2008 14:19:30 Jukka Zitting wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > With all the source code in svn, we can start thinking about making a
> > new release. There are already a number of post-0.7.3 fixes and
> > improvements in the codebase, so I would target for a release as soon
> > as we've reviewed the release contents in relation to Apache policies.
>
>
> Makes sense. How far did the ICLA collection effort go already? Just the
> main committers or also the authors of any non-trivial contribution in
> the past? I think that's a prerequisite to a first release, isn't it?
>
>
> > I've tentatively added a 0.8.0-incubator release tag in the issue
> > tracker. I think it makes sense to upgrade the minor version number to
> > reflect the move to Apache.
>
>
> +1
>
>
> > I'm not sure if we should yet rename the packages from org.pdfbox to
> > org.apache.pdfbox. We could for example do the 0.8.0 release with the
> > current package names, and perhaps do the rename in a 1.0.0 release.
>
>
> I would do the package rename as soon as possible. Since the project
> goes through a major change right now, the package change together with
> the switch to 0.8.x makes sense to me. It also emphasizes the move to
> the ASF. But that's just me.
>
>
>
> Jeremias Maerki
>
>
Re: Next PDFBox release
Posted by Jeremias Maerki <de...@jeremias-maerki.ch>.
On 05.08.2008 16:06:34 Jukka Zitting wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, Aug 5, 2008 at 3:27 PM, Jeremias Maerki <de...@jeremias-maerki.ch> wrote:
> > Makes sense. How far did the ICLA collection effort go already? Just the
> > main committers or also the authors of any non-trivial contribution in
> > the past? I think that's a prerequisite to a first release, isn't it?
>
> We have ICLAs and software grants from the main developers. The
> legal-discuss@ mailing list didn't object to the idea of this being
> sufficient for importing the code (see
> http://markmail.org/message/zy6oweihmenqt6o4), and I believe the same
> to be true also for releasing the code.
Hehe, what answer is no answer? Anyway, you've asked, nobody objected
and I'm happy we don't have to track down each and every one.
> Also, just to be on the safe side we may want to keep the original BSD
> license around and include a "based on" clause in the NOTICE file,
> like this:
>
> Apache PDFBox
> Copyright 2008 The Apache Software Foundation
>
> This product includes software developed at
> The Apache Software Foundation (http://www.apache.org/).
>
> Based on source code originally developed at pdfbox.org.
> Copyright (c) 2002-2008, www.pdfbox.org
I guess that makes sense.
> > I would do the package rename as soon as possible. Since the project
> > goes through a major change right now, the package change together with
> > the switch to 0.8.x makes sense to me.
>
> I'm fine with that.
>
> If we do the package rename now, we could also take the opportunity of
> dropping all deprecated methods and other legacy stuff (if any), as
> downstream users will in any case need to update their source to use
> the renamed packages.
Good idea. I remember I have a couple of points I'd like fixed. I'll
have to make time to present a proposal.
Jeremias Maerki
Re: Next PDFBox release
Posted by Niall Pemberton <ni...@gmail.com>.
On Tue, Aug 5, 2008 at 2:27 PM, Jeremias Maerki <de...@jeremias-maerki.ch> wrote:
> Thanks a lot for handling the source import and related tasks, Jukka!
> I'll look after the website later this week.
>
> On 05.08.2008 14:19:30 Jukka Zitting wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> With all the source code in svn, we can start thinking about making a
>> new release. There are already a number of post-0.7.3 fixes and
>> improvements in the codebase, so I would target for a release as soon
>> as we've reviewed the release contents in relation to Apache policies.
>
> Makes sense. How far did the ICLA collection effort go already? Just the
> main committers or also the authors of any non-trivial contribution in
> the past? I think that's a prerequisite to a first release, isn't it?
>
>> I've tentatively added a 0.8.0-incubator release tag in the issue
>> tracker. I think it makes sense to upgrade the minor version number to
>> reflect the move to Apache.
>
> +1
>
>> I'm not sure if we should yet rename the packages from org.pdfbox to
>> org.apache.pdfbox. We could for example do the 0.8.0 release with the
>> current package names, and perhaps do the rename in a 1.0.0 release.
>
> I would do the package rename as soon as possible. Since the project
> goes through a major change right now, the package change together with
> the switch to 0.8.x makes sense to me. It also emphasizes the move to
> the ASF. But that's just me.
The only reason I can think of for leaving the package rename till
later would be to avoid the possibility of inflicting pain twice on
users in the scenario that pdfbox failed to graduate. So I guess its
whether we want to take an optimistic vs cautious view to graduation.
Niall
> Jeremias Maerki
Re: Next PDFBox release
Posted by Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com>.
Hi,
On Tue, Aug 5, 2008 at 3:27 PM, Jeremias Maerki <de...@jeremias-maerki.ch> wrote:
> Makes sense. How far did the ICLA collection effort go already? Just the
> main committers or also the authors of any non-trivial contribution in
> the past? I think that's a prerequisite to a first release, isn't it?
We have ICLAs and software grants from the main developers. The
legal-discuss@ mailing list didn't object to the idea of this being
sufficient for importing the code (see
http://markmail.org/message/zy6oweihmenqt6o4), and I believe the same
to be true also for releasing the code.
Also, just to be on the safe side we may want to keep the original BSD
license around and include a "based on" clause in the NOTICE file,
like this:
Apache PDFBox
Copyright 2008 The Apache Software Foundation
This product includes software developed at
The Apache Software Foundation (http://www.apache.org/).
Based on source code originally developed at pdfbox.org.
Copyright (c) 2002-2008, www.pdfbox.org
> I would do the package rename as soon as possible. Since the project
> goes through a major change right now, the package change together with
> the switch to 0.8.x makes sense to me.
I'm fine with that.
If we do the package rename now, we could also take the opportunity of
dropping all deprecated methods and other legacy stuff (if any), as
downstream users will in any case need to update their source to use
the renamed packages.
BR,
Jukka Zitting
Re: Next PDFBox release
Posted by Jeremias Maerki <de...@jeremias-maerki.ch>.
Thanks a lot for handling the source import and related tasks, Jukka!
I'll look after the website later this week.
On 05.08.2008 14:19:30 Jukka Zitting wrote:
> Hi,
>
> With all the source code in svn, we can start thinking about making a
> new release. There are already a number of post-0.7.3 fixes and
> improvements in the codebase, so I would target for a release as soon
> as we've reviewed the release contents in relation to Apache policies.
Makes sense. How far did the ICLA collection effort go already? Just the
main committers or also the authors of any non-trivial contribution in
the past? I think that's a prerequisite to a first release, isn't it?
> I've tentatively added a 0.8.0-incubator release tag in the issue
> tracker. I think it makes sense to upgrade the minor version number to
> reflect the move to Apache.
+1
> I'm not sure if we should yet rename the packages from org.pdfbox to
> org.apache.pdfbox. We could for example do the 0.8.0 release with the
> current package names, and perhaps do the rename in a 1.0.0 release.
I would do the package rename as soon as possible. Since the project
goes through a major change right now, the package change together with
the switch to 0.8.x makes sense to me. It also emphasizes the move to
the ASF. But that's just me.
Jeremias Maerki