You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@tomcat.apache.org by Rainer Jung <ra...@kippdata.de> on 2010/07/04 12:00:40 UTC
RTF and fixcrlf during build
The fixcrlf handling of RTF files when packed into the source
distribution has changed as a side effect of
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=893572
It was "don't change" before and "fix" after.
It seems the RTF spec is at least unclear about correct line endings
with a tendency to implicitely assume CRLF. I would favor not touching
the RTF files, so to remove "**/*.rtf" from the patternset.
Any other opinion or RTF experiences?
The only RTF file we have at the moment is res/License.rtf.
Regards,
Rainer
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tomcat.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tomcat.apache.org
Re: RTF and fixcrlf during build
Posted by Konstantin Kolinko <kn...@gmail.com>.
2010/7/4 Rainer Jung <ra...@kippdata.de>:
> The fixcrlf handling of RTF files when packed into the source distribution
> has changed as a side effect of
>
> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=893572
>
> It was "don't change" before and "fix" after.
>
> It seems the RTF spec is at least unclear about correct line endings with a
> tendency to implicitely assume CRLF. I would favor not touching the RTF
> files, so to remove "**/*.rtf" from the patternset.
>
+1 to remove **/*.rtf
We do not have svn:eol-style on those files, so there is no need to do
crlf conversion on them.
> Any other opinion or RTF experiences?
>
> The only RTF file we have at the moment is res/License.rtf.
>
The only important thing is whether the exe installer displays the
files properly. The 5.5.30 and 6.0.28 display the license properly for
me.
A more important question is that these files should match the plain
LICENSE files. I just checked the files and only 6.0.x is OK.
5.5.x:
License.rtf comes from HTTPD. It mentions HTTPD subcomponents, not Tomcat ones.
Running 5.5.30 installer another strange thing happens: the installer
displays plain ASF license only. I suspect that it uses
build/resources/INSTALLLICENSE, not License.rtf
build/tomcat.nsi contains:
!insertmacro MUI_PAGE_LICENSE INSTALLLICENSE
(...)
;License dialog
LicenseData License.rtf
trunk:
License.rtf and INSTALLLICENSE say about Eclipse JDT Java compiler,
while LICENSE says about ecj-x.x.x.jar,
License.rtf and INSTALLLICENSE do not include the CCDL license.
6.0.x:
OK, LICENSE = INSTALLICENSE, and License.rtf matches them.
In all 5.5.x, 6.0.x, trunk:
I think LICENSE needs an empty line before "Common Public License version 1.0"
Maybe we can be more specific to what subcomponents that license applies?
Based on the above experience for 5.5.x, I suspect that we can get rid
of License.rtf and INSTALLLICENSE files, and display the same LICENSE
in the installer.
Best regards,
Konstantin Kolinko
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tomcat.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tomcat.apache.org
Re: RTF and fixcrlf during build
Posted by Jim Jagielski <ji...@jaguNET.com>.
On Jul 4, 2010, at 11:15 AM, Mark Thomas wrote:
> On 04/07/2010 12:00, Rainer Jung wrote:
>> The fixcrlf handling of RTF files when packed into the source
>> distribution has changed as a side effect of
>>
>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=893572
>>
>> It was "don't change" before and "fix" after.
>>
>> It seems the RTF spec is at least unclear about correct line endings
>> with a tendency to implicitely assume CRLF. I would favor not touching
>> the RTF files, so to remove "**/*.rtf" from the patternset.
>
> +1. No objections here.
>
Agreed. +1
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tomcat.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tomcat.apache.org
Re: RTF and fixcrlf during build
Posted by Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org>.
On 04/07/2010 12:00, Rainer Jung wrote:
> The fixcrlf handling of RTF files when packed into the source
> distribution has changed as a side effect of
>
> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=893572
>
> It was "don't change" before and "fix" after.
>
> It seems the RTF spec is at least unclear about correct line endings
> with a tendency to implicitely assume CRLF. I would favor not touching
> the RTF files, so to remove "**/*.rtf" from the patternset.
+1. No objections here.
Mark
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tomcat.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tomcat.apache.org