You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to general@xmlgraphics.apache.org by Jeremias Maerki <de...@greenmail.ch> on 2005/04/03 11:40:44 UTC
Re: [VOTE] Release of Batik 1.6
+1 for the release of Batik 1.6, provided you can answer the question
below with yes.
If there are known issues that are non-critical this is ok, especially
if they are documented.
Yes, you will have to update the LICENSE file for pdf-transcoder.jar to
ALv2 since it applies to the "batik-1_6" tag on the FOP codebase. Xerces
2.5.0, however, was released in 2003 under the older ALv1.1 so you
shouldn't update this one unless you upgrade to the current Xerces
release prior to doing the release.
Rhino: Now this is interesting. Cocoon uses Rhino-1.6R1 and claims it is
distributed under the MPL 1.1 but when I download either 1.6R1 or
1.5R4.1 (the one Batik uses according to the license file) then I see a
reference to NPL 1.1 for both. The website says the same [1]. I found a
post by Greg Stein from Jan 2004 (on the discontinued licensing mailing
list) that NPL and MPL 1.0 are not ok, while MPL 1.1 is ok. Anyway, I
don't see this as a showstopper for the release as we're not doing
anything else than Cocoon. But I want to get this clarified.
[1] http://www.mozilla.org/rhino/download.html
One question: Is the pdf-transcoder.jar revision 1.9 [2] the one you
created from the "batik-1_6" tag in FOP? I can't be sure from the log
entry.
[2] http://cvs.apache.org/viewcvs.cgi/xml-batik/lib/pdf-transcoder.jar?rev=1.9&view=log
Lastly, I'd have preferred that the final vote only ran on batik-dev
(for the Batik committers) and xmlgraphics-general (for the PMC).
There's a bit too much noise ATM.
On 02.04.2005 16:48:52 Thomas DeWeese wrote:
> Hi PMC,
>
> I am requesting a vote on releasing Batik 1.6.
>
> I have created a tag "batik-1_6" that indicates the code
> under consideration. All issues raised on batik-dev (basically
> just comments on problems with javadocs) have been addressed.
>
> Sorry, I don't seem to be able to track down the thread on
> mail-archives.eu.apache.org.
>
> I consider there to be one potentially known bug with regards
> to setting documents on the Canvas, I believe the bug has been in
> Batik since it's last release 1.5.1 and had, to date, not been
> noticed. I considered it more risky to try and fix at this point
> than to leave the code as is:
>
> http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34234
>
> The only other issue I can think of is that the current LICENSE
> files for pdf-transcoder.jar and xerces_2_5_0.jar are the old 1.1
> Apache License. I will update the pdf-transcoder license to the
> 2.0, I am unsure if I can do that for xerces since I think the
> jar we are using was released under the 1.1 license, and I would
> rather not update the jar at this late date - Opinions?
>
> Also along these lines there was some question on the Rhino
> License (Mozilla) when Apache adopted the 2.0 license, last I
> heard we could continue to use it, but things may have changed
> without me knowing about it.
>
> Any other comments or concerns?
Jeremias Maerki
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Apache XML Graphics Project URL: http://xmlgraphics.apache.org/
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@xmlgraphics.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@xmlgraphics.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release of Batik 1.6
Posted by Jeremias Maerki <de...@greenmail.ch>.
Sorry, I didn't mean it that way.
On 03.04.2005 15:17:27 Cameron McCormack wrote:
> Jeremias Maerki:
> > No, but CCing batik-dev so everyone knows that the PMC is voting on the
> > release is generally a good idea, although not strictly necessary.
> > Cameron's vote, in any case, wasn't necessary.
>
> I feel less special now. ;-)
Jeremias Maerki
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Apache XML Graphics Project URL: http://xmlgraphics.apache.org/
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@xmlgraphics.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@xmlgraphics.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release of Batik 1.6
Posted by Jeremias Maerki <de...@greenmail.ch>.
Sorry, I didn't mean it that way.
On 03.04.2005 15:17:27 Cameron McCormack wrote:
> Jeremias Maerki:
> > No, but CCing batik-dev so everyone knows that the PMC is voting on the
> > release is generally a good idea, although not strictly necessary.
> > Cameron's vote, in any case, wasn't necessary.
>
> I feel less special now. ;-)
Jeremias Maerki
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: batik-dev-unsubscribe@xmlgraphics.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: batik-dev-help@xmlgraphics.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release of Batik 1.6
Posted by Cameron McCormack <ca...@aka.mcc.id.au>.
Jeremias Maerki:
> No, but CCing batik-dev so everyone knows that the PMC is voting on the
> release is generally a good idea, although not strictly necessary.
> Cameron's vote, in any case, wasn't necessary.
I feel less special now. ;-)
--
e-mail : cam (at) mcc.id.au icq : 26955922
web : http://mcc.id.au/ msn : cam-msn (at) aka.mcc.id.au
office : +61399055779 jabber : heycam (at) jabber.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: batik-dev-unsubscribe@xmlgraphics.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: batik-dev-help@xmlgraphics.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release of Batik 1.6
Posted by Cameron McCormack <ca...@aka.mcc.id.au>.
Jeremias Maerki:
> No, but CCing batik-dev so everyone knows that the PMC is voting on the
> release is generally a good idea, although not strictly necessary.
> Cameron's vote, in any case, wasn't necessary.
I feel less special now. ;-)
--
e-mail : cam (at) mcc.id.au icq : 26955922
web : http://mcc.id.au/ msn : cam-msn (at) aka.mcc.id.au
office : +61399055779 jabber : heycam (at) jabber.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Apache XML Graphics Project URL: http://xmlgraphics.apache.org/
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@xmlgraphics.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@xmlgraphics.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release of Batik 1.6
Posted by Jeremias Maerki <de...@greenmail.ch>.
On 03.04.2005 14:52:48 Thomas DeWeese wrote:
> Hi Jeremias,
>
> Jeremias Maerki wrote:
<snip/>
> > Rhino: Now this is interesting. Cocoon uses Rhino-1.6R1 and claims it is
> > distributed under the MPL 1.1 but when I download either 1.6R1 or
> > 1.5R4.1 (the one Batik uses according to the license file) then I see a
> > reference to NPL 1.1 for both. The website says the same [1]. I found a
> > post by Greg Stein from Jan 2004 (on the discontinued licensing mailing
> > list) that NPL and MPL 1.0 are not ok, while MPL 1.1 is ok. Anyway, I
> > don't see this as a showstopper for the release as we're not doing
> > anything else than Cocoon. But I want to get this clarified.
>
> Are there four licenses NPL 1.0, MPL 1.0 (both not OK),
> NPL 1.1 (unknown status), MPL 1.1 (is OK) or was there a typo
> above?
I was talking about the NPL in general. I was not referring to a
specific version. Greg Stein's post also didn't mention a version number
for the NPL. So, not really a typo but a possible cause for
misunderstanding.
> Also you say this isn't a show stopper but you want to get it
> clarified. Does this mean that as far as you are concerned I can
> go ahead, or should I wait on the clarification?
If you want, you can wait. But I'd say you don't have to. If we have a
problem here, then Cocoon has, too.
> > One question: Is the pdf-transcoder.jar revision 1.9 [2] the one you
> > created from the "batik-1_6" tag in FOP? I can't be sure from the log
> > entry.
>
> Yes, it is, I forgot to include it in the log message (I would
> have updated the log entry if we were using SVN ;).
*g* Thanks for the clarification.
> > Lastly, I'd have preferred that the final vote only ran on batik-dev
> > (for the Batik committers) and xmlgraphics-general (for the PMC).
> > There's a bit too much noise ATM.
>
> Do I really need to run another vote on batik-dev? Cameron
> has already given his +1 twice. BTW the mod-box doesn't seem to
> be collecting mails for April...
No, but CCing batik-dev so everyone knows that the PMC is voting on the
release is generally a good idea, although not strictly necessary.
Cameron's vote, in any case, wasn't necessary.
Jeremias Maerki
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: batik-dev-unsubscribe@xmlgraphics.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: batik-dev-help@xmlgraphics.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release of Batik 1.6
Posted by Simon Pepping <sp...@leverkruid.nl>.
+1 from me.
Regards, Simon
On Sun, Apr 03, 2005 at 11:40:44AM +0200, Jeremias Maerki wrote:
> +1 for the release of Batik 1.6, provided you can answer the question
> below with yes.
>
> If there are known issues that are non-critical this is ok, especially
> if they are documented.
--
Simon Pepping
home page: http://www.leverkruid.nl
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Apache XML Graphics Project URL: http://xmlgraphics.apache.org/
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@xmlgraphics.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@xmlgraphics.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release of Batik 1.6
Posted by Jeremias Maerki <de...@greenmail.ch>.
On 03.04.2005 14:52:48 Thomas DeWeese wrote:
> Hi Jeremias,
>
> Jeremias Maerki wrote:
<snip/>
> > Rhino: Now this is interesting. Cocoon uses Rhino-1.6R1 and claims it is
> > distributed under the MPL 1.1 but when I download either 1.6R1 or
> > 1.5R4.1 (the one Batik uses according to the license file) then I see a
> > reference to NPL 1.1 for both. The website says the same [1]. I found a
> > post by Greg Stein from Jan 2004 (on the discontinued licensing mailing
> > list) that NPL and MPL 1.0 are not ok, while MPL 1.1 is ok. Anyway, I
> > don't see this as a showstopper for the release as we're not doing
> > anything else than Cocoon. But I want to get this clarified.
>
> Are there four licenses NPL 1.0, MPL 1.0 (both not OK),
> NPL 1.1 (unknown status), MPL 1.1 (is OK) or was there a typo
> above?
I was talking about the NPL in general. I was not referring to a
specific version. Greg Stein's post also didn't mention a version number
for the NPL. So, not really a typo but a possible cause for
misunderstanding.
> Also you say this isn't a show stopper but you want to get it
> clarified. Does this mean that as far as you are concerned I can
> go ahead, or should I wait on the clarification?
If you want, you can wait. But I'd say you don't have to. If we have a
problem here, then Cocoon has, too.
> > One question: Is the pdf-transcoder.jar revision 1.9 [2] the one you
> > created from the "batik-1_6" tag in FOP? I can't be sure from the log
> > entry.
>
> Yes, it is, I forgot to include it in the log message (I would
> have updated the log entry if we were using SVN ;).
*g* Thanks for the clarification.
> > Lastly, I'd have preferred that the final vote only ran on batik-dev
> > (for the Batik committers) and xmlgraphics-general (for the PMC).
> > There's a bit too much noise ATM.
>
> Do I really need to run another vote on batik-dev? Cameron
> has already given his +1 twice. BTW the mod-box doesn't seem to
> be collecting mails for April...
No, but CCing batik-dev so everyone knows that the PMC is voting on the
release is generally a good idea, although not strictly necessary.
Cameron's vote, in any case, wasn't necessary.
Jeremias Maerki
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Apache XML Graphics Project URL: http://xmlgraphics.apache.org/
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@xmlgraphics.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@xmlgraphics.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release of Batik 1.6
Posted by Thomas DeWeese <Th...@Kodak.com>.
Hi Jeremias,
Jeremias Maerki wrote:
> +1 for the release of Batik 1.6, provided you can answer the question
> below with yes.
Thanks.
> If there are known issues that are non-critical this is ok, especially
> if they are documented.
>
> Yes, you will have to update the LICENSE file for pdf-transcoder.jar to
> ALv2 since it applies to the "batik-1_6" tag on the FOP codebase.
I've already done this locally.
> Xerces 2.5.0, however, was released in 2003 under the older ALv1.1
> so you shouldn't update this one unless you upgrade to the current
> Xerces release prior to doing the release.
This is what I thought. I just wanted to make sure that making a
release that included ALv1.1 would be Ok.
> Rhino: Now this is interesting. Cocoon uses Rhino-1.6R1 and claims it is
> distributed under the MPL 1.1 but when I download either 1.6R1 or
> 1.5R4.1 (the one Batik uses according to the license file) then I see a
> reference to NPL 1.1 for both. The website says the same [1]. I found a
> post by Greg Stein from Jan 2004 (on the discontinued licensing mailing
> list) that NPL and MPL 1.0 are not ok, while MPL 1.1 is ok. Anyway, I
> don't see this as a showstopper for the release as we're not doing
> anything else than Cocoon. But I want to get this clarified.
Are there four licenses NPL 1.0, MPL 1.0 (both not OK),
NPL 1.1 (unknown status), MPL 1.1 (is OK) or was there a typo
above?
Also you say this isn't a show stopper but you want to get it
clarified. Does this mean that as far as you are concerned I can
go ahead, or should I wait on the clarification?
> One question: Is the pdf-transcoder.jar revision 1.9 [2] the one you
> created from the "batik-1_6" tag in FOP? I can't be sure from the log
> entry.
Yes, it is, I forgot to include it in the log message (I would
have updated the log entry if we were using SVN ;).
> Lastly, I'd have preferred that the final vote only ran on batik-dev
> (for the Batik committers) and xmlgraphics-general (for the PMC).
> There's a bit too much noise ATM.
Do I really need to run another vote on batik-dev? Cameron
has already given his +1 twice. BTW the mod-box doesn't seem to
be collecting mails for April...
> [1] http://www.mozilla.org/rhino/download.html
> [2] http://cvs.apache.org/viewcvs.cgi/xml-batik/lib/pdf-transcoder.jar?rev=1.9&view=log
> On 02.04.2005 16:48:52 Thomas DeWeese wrote:
>
>>Hi PMC,
>>
>> I am requesting a vote on releasing Batik 1.6.
>>
>> I have created a tag "batik-1_6" that indicates the code
>>under consideration. All issues raised on batik-dev (basically
>>just comments on problems with javadocs) have been addressed.
>>
>> Sorry, I don't seem to be able to track down the thread on
>>mail-archives.eu.apache.org.
>>
>> I consider there to be one potentially known bug with regards
>>to setting documents on the Canvas, I believe the bug has been in
>>Batik since it's last release 1.5.1 and had, to date, not been
>>noticed. I considered it more risky to try and fix at this point
>>than to leave the code as is:
>>
>> http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34234
>>
>> The only other issue I can think of is that the current LICENSE
>>files for pdf-transcoder.jar and xerces_2_5_0.jar are the old 1.1
>>Apache License. I will update the pdf-transcoder license to the
>>2.0, I am unsure if I can do that for xerces since I think the
>>jar we are using was released under the 1.1 license, and I would
>>rather not update the jar at this late date - Opinions?
>>
>> Also along these lines there was some question on the Rhino
>>License (Mozilla) when Apache adopted the 2.0 license, last I
>>heard we could continue to use it, but things may have changed
>>without me knowing about it.
>>
>> Any other comments or concerns?
>
>
>
>
> Jeremias Maerki
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> Apache XML Graphics Project URL: http://xmlgraphics.apache.org/
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@xmlgraphics.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@xmlgraphics.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: batik-dev-unsubscribe@xmlgraphics.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: batik-dev-help@xmlgraphics.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release of Batik 1.6
Posted by Thomas DeWeese <Th...@Kodak.com>.
Hi Jeremias,
Jeremias Maerki wrote:
> +1 for the release of Batik 1.6, provided you can answer the question
> below with yes.
Thanks.
> If there are known issues that are non-critical this is ok, especially
> if they are documented.
>
> Yes, you will have to update the LICENSE file for pdf-transcoder.jar to
> ALv2 since it applies to the "batik-1_6" tag on the FOP codebase.
I've already done this locally.
> Xerces 2.5.0, however, was released in 2003 under the older ALv1.1
> so you shouldn't update this one unless you upgrade to the current
> Xerces release prior to doing the release.
This is what I thought. I just wanted to make sure that making a
release that included ALv1.1 would be Ok.
> Rhino: Now this is interesting. Cocoon uses Rhino-1.6R1 and claims it is
> distributed under the MPL 1.1 but when I download either 1.6R1 or
> 1.5R4.1 (the one Batik uses according to the license file) then I see a
> reference to NPL 1.1 for both. The website says the same [1]. I found a
> post by Greg Stein from Jan 2004 (on the discontinued licensing mailing
> list) that NPL and MPL 1.0 are not ok, while MPL 1.1 is ok. Anyway, I
> don't see this as a showstopper for the release as we're not doing
> anything else than Cocoon. But I want to get this clarified.
Are there four licenses NPL 1.0, MPL 1.0 (both not OK),
NPL 1.1 (unknown status), MPL 1.1 (is OK) or was there a typo
above?
Also you say this isn't a show stopper but you want to get it
clarified. Does this mean that as far as you are concerned I can
go ahead, or should I wait on the clarification?
> One question: Is the pdf-transcoder.jar revision 1.9 [2] the one you
> created from the "batik-1_6" tag in FOP? I can't be sure from the log
> entry.
Yes, it is, I forgot to include it in the log message (I would
have updated the log entry if we were using SVN ;).
> Lastly, I'd have preferred that the final vote only ran on batik-dev
> (for the Batik committers) and xmlgraphics-general (for the PMC).
> There's a bit too much noise ATM.
Do I really need to run another vote on batik-dev? Cameron
has already given his +1 twice. BTW the mod-box doesn't seem to
be collecting mails for April...
> [1] http://www.mozilla.org/rhino/download.html
> [2] http://cvs.apache.org/viewcvs.cgi/xml-batik/lib/pdf-transcoder.jar?rev=1.9&view=log
> On 02.04.2005 16:48:52 Thomas DeWeese wrote:
>
>>Hi PMC,
>>
>> I am requesting a vote on releasing Batik 1.6.
>>
>> I have created a tag "batik-1_6" that indicates the code
>>under consideration. All issues raised on batik-dev (basically
>>just comments on problems with javadocs) have been addressed.
>>
>> Sorry, I don't seem to be able to track down the thread on
>>mail-archives.eu.apache.org.
>>
>> I consider there to be one potentially known bug with regards
>>to setting documents on the Canvas, I believe the bug has been in
>>Batik since it's last release 1.5.1 and had, to date, not been
>>noticed. I considered it more risky to try and fix at this point
>>than to leave the code as is:
>>
>> http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34234
>>
>> The only other issue I can think of is that the current LICENSE
>>files for pdf-transcoder.jar and xerces_2_5_0.jar are the old 1.1
>>Apache License. I will update the pdf-transcoder license to the
>>2.0, I am unsure if I can do that for xerces since I think the
>>jar we are using was released under the 1.1 license, and I would
>>rather not update the jar at this late date - Opinions?
>>
>> Also along these lines there was some question on the Rhino
>>License (Mozilla) when Apache adopted the 2.0 license, last I
>>heard we could continue to use it, but things may have changed
>>without me knowing about it.
>>
>> Any other comments or concerns?
>
>
>
>
> Jeremias Maerki
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> Apache XML Graphics Project URL: http://xmlgraphics.apache.org/
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@xmlgraphics.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@xmlgraphics.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Apache XML Graphics Project URL: http://xmlgraphics.apache.org/
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@xmlgraphics.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@xmlgraphics.apache.org