You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to fop-dev@xmlgraphics.apache.org by Jeremias Maerki <de...@jeremias-maerki.ch> on 2008/02/25 14:11:29 UTC
Reverting changes in AFP Renderer
FYI, I'm going to revert the AFP Renderer in Trunk to revision 601712
(the revision before 603590 (2007-12-12) which broke the AFP Renderer).
Obviously, I'll have to reapply some of the changes that were done
in the meantime (like the image integration or changes in
AbstractPathOrientedRenderer). I'll do this so I can prepare the 0.95
release candidate later this week without a broken AFP renderer.
Adrian, please continue working on the branch you've created. We can
merge it back into Trunk when you've fixed the AFP Renderer with the
GOCA addition.
Jeremias Maerki
Re: future renderer design (was: Reverting changes in AFP Renderer)
Posted by Jeremias Maerki <de...@jeremias-maerki.ch>.
On 27.02.2008 17:09:49 Adrian Cumiskey wrote:
> Reply below..
>
> Jeremias Maerki wrote:
> > I'm not sure I follow you. Do you mean that you'd always maintain the
> > transformation stack in the renderer? That's certainly something that
> > needs to be done in a uniform way.
>
> Yes, a base renderer/painter could maintain both the transformation stack and common palette state
> features (paint color, brush thickness, font etc) as it traverses the block levels within the area tree.
>
> > For PDF/PS/Java2D you'd still always
> > apply any transformation to the output formats. For PCL (and probably
> > AFP) you wouldn't do that (because you can't) but instead apply the
> > current transformation to any coordinate that needs to be accessed in a
> > uniform way. Is that it? If yes, you could simply pull up the
> > graphicContext and graphicContextStack fields from PCLRenderer and
> > establish that pattern for all subclasses.
>
> Could these coordinate transformations not be done by FOP as it is rendering the output file rather
> than delegating responsibility of performing these transformations to the PDF/PS interpreter?
Only to a certain extent. For painting text, you still have to write a
text matrix (Tm) to the output format because otherwise, you'd have to
paint the text using shapes which is not what we want. And for painting
nested graphics you'd also have no other way than to establish new
coordinate systems in the output format because you may not have full
control over what plug-ins do in terms of painting code production (EPS,
for example). At any rate, I'd find it unfortunate if we didn't make use
of some of the basic features of such document formats.
> With
> this approach, the same rendering mechanism could be shared amongst renderers, just the absolute
> coordinates would be provided in the output file and not a series of matrices with which to derive
> the coordinates. This should result in printing/displaying being a little faster as the output
> format interpreter would be saved from having to do as many matrix calculations at runtime, also the
> resulting output file would be smaller for each document. Hope you follow my thinking.
I don't buy the "faster" and "smaller" argument. The "smaller" maybe to
a very small extent. You'd still have to write many transformation
matrices to the output format. And these will be more complex (and more
difficult to debug) if they are always combined with all previous
transformations. You'd only save a bit if you have many fixed positioned
block-containers (break-out & restore). Concerning the performance
aspect, the critical parts are the parsing of the intermediate format, handling
nested graphics and font embedding, not the renderer itself. Whether you
do the transformation inside FOP or in the output format I don't expect
a significant change in performance. Or did you do some profiling that
would lead you in this direction?
Jeremias Maerki
Re: Reverting changes in AFP Renderer
Posted by Adrian Cumiskey <ad...@gmail.com>.
Reply below..
Jeremias Maerki wrote:
> I'm not sure I follow you. Do you mean that you'd always maintain the
> transformation stack in the renderer? That's certainly something that
> needs to be done in a uniform way.
Yes, a base renderer/painter could maintain both the transformation stack and common palette state
features (paint color, brush thickness, font etc) as it traverses the block levels within the area tree.
> For PDF/PS/Java2D you'd still always
> apply any transformation to the output formats. For PCL (and probably
> AFP) you wouldn't do that (because you can't) but instead apply the
> current transformation to any coordinate that needs to be accessed in a
> uniform way. Is that it? If yes, you could simply pull up the
> graphicContext and graphicContextStack fields from PCLRenderer and
> establish that pattern for all subclasses.
Could these coordinate transformations not be done by FOP as it is rendering the output file rather
than delegating responsibility of performing these transformations to the PDF/PS interpreter? With
this approach, the same rendering mechanism could be shared amongst renderers, just the absolute
coordinates would be provided in the output file and not a series of matrices with which to derive
the coordinates. This should result in printing/displaying being a little faster as the output
format interpreter would be saved from having to do as many matrix calculations at runtime, also the
resulting output file would be smaller for each document. Hope you follow my thinking.
Adrian.
Re: Reverting changes in AFP Renderer
Posted by Jeremias Maerki <de...@jeremias-maerki.ch>.
I'm not sure I follow you. Do you mean that you'd always maintain the
transformation stack in the renderer? That's certainly something that
needs to be done in a uniform way. For PDF/PS/Java2D you'd still always
apply any transformation to the output formats. For PCL (and probably
AFP) you wouldn't do that (because you can't) but instead apply the
current transformation to any coordinate that needs to be accessed in a
uniform way. Is that it? If yes, you could simply pull up the
graphicContext and graphicContextStack fields from PCLRenderer and
establish that pattern for all subclasses.
On 26.02.2008 18:02:13 Adrian Cumiskey wrote:
> Generally speaking (not just AFP), at the moment the AbstractPathOrientedRenderer and its parents
> dumbly pass coordinates down to their implementing renderer and rely upon the implementing renderer
> to workout the transformation using lots of pts2units()/mpts2units() method calls. I think it would
> be better if each implementing renderer/painter provides a base AffineTransform to which a base
> renderer/painter is able to transform coordinate values. The base class could then maintain
> rendering/painting state, pushing and popping on breakin/breakout as the area tree is traversed,
> passing on the correctly transformed coordinates (using the implementing transformation matrix) to
> the concrete implementations.
>
> Adrian.
>
> Jeremias Maerki wrote:
> > The revision 603590 is now reverted and a couple of other changes
> > applied: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=631178&view=rev
> >
> > On 26.02.2008 11:45:17 Adrian Cumiskey wrote:
> >> Hi Jeremias,
> >>
> >> Yes I noticed this too in the AFP renderer and I am looking at trying to reuse more of
> >> AbstractPathOrientedRenderer and bring it more into line with the state/breakout approach of the
> >> PDF/PS renderers in the Temp_AFPAffineTransform branch. Also looking to start using stateful
> >> (depending on breakin/out) AffineTransform for all coordinate calculations rather than using these
> >> mpts2units() type methods everywhere. I'd be interested to hear your thoughts on this.
> >
> > I don't know enough of AFP to say if a coordinate system stack is
> > somehow supported. If it is, please try to make use of it especially if
> > this gives you clipping functionality as a side-effect. Otherwise, please
> > take a look at the PCLRenderer where I had to take a slightly different
> > approach handling the coordinate system changes. I used AffineTransform
> > heavily there and I think the AFP Renderer should do something similar.
> > BTW, we should try to get away from using the CTM class as it's
> > basically a clone of AffineTransform. I'm really not sure if coercing
> > the AFPRenderer into the patterns of AbstractPathOrientedRenderer is
> > such a good thing. Maybe AbstractPathOrientedRenderer has to be split up
> > into two classes to avoid certain hacks in the concrete subclasses.
> >
> > How well we can avoid unit transformations is another question. The
> > PDF/PS renderer uses points as basic length unit and the layout engine
> > uses millipoints. The use of points and millipoints is mixed in many
> > places which is not beautiful. I tried to harmonize the whole usage in
> > the various renderers over time but I haven't taken any radical approach
> > there, yet.
> >
> >> I think its important to try and bring all the renderers more closely into line with each other
> >> prior to to the new area tree design Painter implementation
> >> (http://wiki.apache.org/xmlgraphics-fop/AreaTreeIntermediateXml/NewDesign).
> >
> > I'm not sure that is necessary, helpful or worth the effort. Relying on
> > the old approach (which has organically grown too much over time) may
> > not be the best idea, i.e. implementing the new IFRenderer based on
> > AbstractPathOrientedRenderer. At any rate, it's going to be extremely
> > important to design the details by taking all currently supported output
> > formats into account. Especially PCL is going to be a PITA if we want to
> > stick to PCL native commands rather than rendering whole pages as
> > bitmaps like many Windows printer drivers do.
> >
> > HTH
> >
> >> Adrian.
> >>
> >> Jeremias Maerki wrote:
> >>> Interesting. I just noticed that the break-out mechanism hasn't been
> >>> implemented for the AFP renderer and therefore fixed positioned
> >>> block-containers are not even supported in 0.94. Hmm. I guess I will
> >>> skip that then. I'm only hacking together the same feature level as in
> >>> 0.94 anyway.
> >>>
> >>> It turns out the AFP renderer has more in common with the PCL renderer
> >>> (no nested coordinate system mechanism is used) than with PDF/PS/Java2D
> >>> and still it's been derived from AbstractPathOrientedRenderer. I guess
> >>> this should be improved when the GOCA stuff is working again. I just
> >>> want the release done.
> >>>
> >>> On 26.02.2008 10:53:01 Jeremias Maerki wrote:
> >>>> Thanks for the hint. That worked indeed. I've almost finished by now. I
> >>>> only have to finish the adjustment for the changed CTM behaviour in
> >>>> BlockViewports.
> >>>>
> >>>> On 25.02.2008 14:27:27 Adrian Cumiskey wrote:
> >>>>> Hi Jeremias,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I started to do this but if you prefer then be all means go ahead and revert yourself. The approach
> >>>>> I took was to take a trunk checkout and then apply
> >>>>>
> >>>>> svn merge -r603590:603589 .
> >>>>>
> >>>>> This should give you all the changes between commits (as 603589 works ok, but 603590 is broken) and
> >>>>> this should affect only the files in the 603590 commit you should keep all the new stuff in trunk.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Adrian.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Jeremias Maerki wrote:
> >>>>>> FYI, I'm going to revert the AFP Renderer in Trunk to revision 601712
> >>>>>> (the revision before 603590 (2007-12-12) which broke the AFP Renderer).
> >>>>>> Obviously, I'll have to reapply some of the changes that were done
> >>>>>> in the meantime (like the image integration or changes in
> >>>>>> AbstractPathOrientedRenderer). I'll do this so I can prepare the 0.95
> >>>>>> release candidate later this week without a broken AFP renderer.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Adrian, please continue working on the branch you've created. We can
> >>>>>> merge it back into Trunk when you've fixed the AFP Renderer with the
> >>>>>> GOCA addition.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Jeremias Maerki
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Jeremias Maerki
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Jeremias Maerki
> >>>
> >>>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Jeremias Maerki
> >
> >
Jeremias Maerki
Re: Reverting changes in AFP Renderer
Posted by Adrian Cumiskey <ad...@gmail.com>.
Generally speaking (not just AFP), at the moment the AbstractPathOrientedRenderer and its parents
dumbly pass coordinates down to their implementing renderer and rely upon the implementing renderer
to workout the transformation using lots of pts2units()/mpts2units() method calls. I think it would
be better if each implementing renderer/painter provides a base AffineTransform to which a base
renderer/painter is able to transform coordinate values. The base class could then maintain
rendering/painting state, pushing and popping on breakin/breakout as the area tree is traversed,
passing on the correctly transformed coordinates (using the implementing transformation matrix) to
the concrete implementations.
Adrian.
Jeremias Maerki wrote:
> The revision 603590 is now reverted and a couple of other changes
> applied: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=631178&view=rev
>
> On 26.02.2008 11:45:17 Adrian Cumiskey wrote:
>> Hi Jeremias,
>>
>> Yes I noticed this too in the AFP renderer and I am looking at trying to reuse more of
>> AbstractPathOrientedRenderer and bring it more into line with the state/breakout approach of the
>> PDF/PS renderers in the Temp_AFPAffineTransform branch. Also looking to start using stateful
>> (depending on breakin/out) AffineTransform for all coordinate calculations rather than using these
>> mpts2units() type methods everywhere. I'd be interested to hear your thoughts on this.
>
> I don't know enough of AFP to say if a coordinate system stack is
> somehow supported. If it is, please try to make use of it especially if
> this gives you clipping functionality as a side-effect. Otherwise, please
> take a look at the PCLRenderer where I had to take a slightly different
> approach handling the coordinate system changes. I used AffineTransform
> heavily there and I think the AFP Renderer should do something similar.
> BTW, we should try to get away from using the CTM class as it's
> basically a clone of AffineTransform. I'm really not sure if coercing
> the AFPRenderer into the patterns of AbstractPathOrientedRenderer is
> such a good thing. Maybe AbstractPathOrientedRenderer has to be split up
> into two classes to avoid certain hacks in the concrete subclasses.
>
> How well we can avoid unit transformations is another question. The
> PDF/PS renderer uses points as basic length unit and the layout engine
> uses millipoints. The use of points and millipoints is mixed in many
> places which is not beautiful. I tried to harmonize the whole usage in
> the various renderers over time but I haven't taken any radical approach
> there, yet.
>
>> I think its important to try and bring all the renderers more closely into line with each other
>> prior to to the new area tree design Painter implementation
>> (http://wiki.apache.org/xmlgraphics-fop/AreaTreeIntermediateXml/NewDesign).
>
> I'm not sure that is necessary, helpful or worth the effort. Relying on
> the old approach (which has organically grown too much over time) may
> not be the best idea, i.e. implementing the new IFRenderer based on
> AbstractPathOrientedRenderer. At any rate, it's going to be extremely
> important to design the details by taking all currently supported output
> formats into account. Especially PCL is going to be a PITA if we want to
> stick to PCL native commands rather than rendering whole pages as
> bitmaps like many Windows printer drivers do.
>
> HTH
>
>> Adrian.
>>
>> Jeremias Maerki wrote:
>>> Interesting. I just noticed that the break-out mechanism hasn't been
>>> implemented for the AFP renderer and therefore fixed positioned
>>> block-containers are not even supported in 0.94. Hmm. I guess I will
>>> skip that then. I'm only hacking together the same feature level as in
>>> 0.94 anyway.
>>>
>>> It turns out the AFP renderer has more in common with the PCL renderer
>>> (no nested coordinate system mechanism is used) than with PDF/PS/Java2D
>>> and still it's been derived from AbstractPathOrientedRenderer. I guess
>>> this should be improved when the GOCA stuff is working again. I just
>>> want the release done.
>>>
>>> On 26.02.2008 10:53:01 Jeremias Maerki wrote:
>>>> Thanks for the hint. That worked indeed. I've almost finished by now. I
>>>> only have to finish the adjustment for the changed CTM behaviour in
>>>> BlockViewports.
>>>>
>>>> On 25.02.2008 14:27:27 Adrian Cumiskey wrote:
>>>>> Hi Jeremias,
>>>>>
>>>>> I started to do this but if you prefer then be all means go ahead and revert yourself. The approach
>>>>> I took was to take a trunk checkout and then apply
>>>>>
>>>>> svn merge -r603590:603589 .
>>>>>
>>>>> This should give you all the changes between commits (as 603589 works ok, but 603590 is broken) and
>>>>> this should affect only the files in the 603590 commit you should keep all the new stuff in trunk.
>>>>>
>>>>> Adrian.
>>>>>
>>>>> Jeremias Maerki wrote:
>>>>>> FYI, I'm going to revert the AFP Renderer in Trunk to revision 601712
>>>>>> (the revision before 603590 (2007-12-12) which broke the AFP Renderer).
>>>>>> Obviously, I'll have to reapply some of the changes that were done
>>>>>> in the meantime (like the image integration or changes in
>>>>>> AbstractPathOrientedRenderer). I'll do this so I can prepare the 0.95
>>>>>> release candidate later this week without a broken AFP renderer.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Adrian, please continue working on the branch you've created. We can
>>>>>> merge it back into Trunk when you've fixed the AFP Renderer with the
>>>>>> GOCA addition.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Jeremias Maerki
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Jeremias Maerki
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Jeremias Maerki
>>>
>>>
>
>
>
>
> Jeremias Maerki
>
>
Re: Reverting changes in AFP Renderer
Posted by Jeremias Maerki <de...@jeremias-maerki.ch>.
The revision 603590 is now reverted and a couple of other changes
applied: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=631178&view=rev
On 26.02.2008 11:45:17 Adrian Cumiskey wrote:
> Hi Jeremias,
>
> Yes I noticed this too in the AFP renderer and I am looking at trying to reuse more of
> AbstractPathOrientedRenderer and bring it more into line with the state/breakout approach of the
> PDF/PS renderers in the Temp_AFPAffineTransform branch. Also looking to start using stateful
> (depending on breakin/out) AffineTransform for all coordinate calculations rather than using these
> mpts2units() type methods everywhere. I'd be interested to hear your thoughts on this.
I don't know enough of AFP to say if a coordinate system stack is
somehow supported. If it is, please try to make use of it especially if
this gives you clipping functionality as a side-effect. Otherwise, please
take a look at the PCLRenderer where I had to take a slightly different
approach handling the coordinate system changes. I used AffineTransform
heavily there and I think the AFP Renderer should do something similar.
BTW, we should try to get away from using the CTM class as it's
basically a clone of AffineTransform. I'm really not sure if coercing
the AFPRenderer into the patterns of AbstractPathOrientedRenderer is
such a good thing. Maybe AbstractPathOrientedRenderer has to be split up
into two classes to avoid certain hacks in the concrete subclasses.
How well we can avoid unit transformations is another question. The
PDF/PS renderer uses points as basic length unit and the layout engine
uses millipoints. The use of points and millipoints is mixed in many
places which is not beautiful. I tried to harmonize the whole usage in
the various renderers over time but I haven't taken any radical approach
there, yet.
> I think its important to try and bring all the renderers more closely into line with each other
> prior to to the new area tree design Painter implementation
> (http://wiki.apache.org/xmlgraphics-fop/AreaTreeIntermediateXml/NewDesign).
I'm not sure that is necessary, helpful or worth the effort. Relying on
the old approach (which has organically grown too much over time) may
not be the best idea, i.e. implementing the new IFRenderer based on
AbstractPathOrientedRenderer. At any rate, it's going to be extremely
important to design the details by taking all currently supported output
formats into account. Especially PCL is going to be a PITA if we want to
stick to PCL native commands rather than rendering whole pages as
bitmaps like many Windows printer drivers do.
HTH
> Adrian.
>
> Jeremias Maerki wrote:
> > Interesting. I just noticed that the break-out mechanism hasn't been
> > implemented for the AFP renderer and therefore fixed positioned
> > block-containers are not even supported in 0.94. Hmm. I guess I will
> > skip that then. I'm only hacking together the same feature level as in
> > 0.94 anyway.
> >
> > It turns out the AFP renderer has more in common with the PCL renderer
> > (no nested coordinate system mechanism is used) than with PDF/PS/Java2D
> > and still it's been derived from AbstractPathOrientedRenderer. I guess
> > this should be improved when the GOCA stuff is working again. I just
> > want the release done.
> >
> > On 26.02.2008 10:53:01 Jeremias Maerki wrote:
> >> Thanks for the hint. That worked indeed. I've almost finished by now. I
> >> only have to finish the adjustment for the changed CTM behaviour in
> >> BlockViewports.
> >>
> >> On 25.02.2008 14:27:27 Adrian Cumiskey wrote:
> >>> Hi Jeremias,
> >>>
> >>> I started to do this but if you prefer then be all means go ahead and revert yourself. The approach
> >>> I took was to take a trunk checkout and then apply
> >>>
> >>> svn merge -r603590:603589 .
> >>>
> >>> This should give you all the changes between commits (as 603589 works ok, but 603590 is broken) and
> >>> this should affect only the files in the 603590 commit you should keep all the new stuff in trunk.
> >>>
> >>> Adrian.
> >>>
> >>> Jeremias Maerki wrote:
> >>>> FYI, I'm going to revert the AFP Renderer in Trunk to revision 601712
> >>>> (the revision before 603590 (2007-12-12) which broke the AFP Renderer).
> >>>> Obviously, I'll have to reapply some of the changes that were done
> >>>> in the meantime (like the image integration or changes in
> >>>> AbstractPathOrientedRenderer). I'll do this so I can prepare the 0.95
> >>>> release candidate later this week without a broken AFP renderer.
> >>>>
> >>>> Adrian, please continue working on the branch you've created. We can
> >>>> merge it back into Trunk when you've fixed the AFP Renderer with the
> >>>> GOCA addition.
> >>>>
> >>>> Jeremias Maerki
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Jeremias Maerki
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Jeremias Maerki
> >
> >
Jeremias Maerki
Re: Reverting changes in AFP Renderer
Posted by Adrian Cumiskey <ad...@gmail.com>.
Hi Jeremias,
Yes I noticed this too in the AFP renderer and I am looking at trying to reuse more of
AbstractPathOrientedRenderer and bring it more into line with the state/breakout approach of the
PDF/PS renderers in the Temp_AFPAffineTransform branch. Also looking to start using stateful
(depending on breakin/out) AffineTransform for all coordinate calculations rather than using these
mpts2units() type methods everywhere. I'd be interested to hear your thoughts on this.
I think its important to try and bring all the renderers more closely into line with each other
prior to to the new area tree design Painter implementation
(http://wiki.apache.org/xmlgraphics-fop/AreaTreeIntermediateXml/NewDesign).
Adrian.
Jeremias Maerki wrote:
> Interesting. I just noticed that the break-out mechanism hasn't been
> implemented for the AFP renderer and therefore fixed positioned
> block-containers are not even supported in 0.94. Hmm. I guess I will
> skip that then. I'm only hacking together the same feature level as in
> 0.94 anyway.
>
> It turns out the AFP renderer has more in common with the PCL renderer
> (no nested coordinate system mechanism is used) than with PDF/PS/Java2D
> and still it's been derived from AbstractPathOrientedRenderer. I guess
> this should be improved when the GOCA stuff is working again. I just
> want the release done.
>
> On 26.02.2008 10:53:01 Jeremias Maerki wrote:
>> Thanks for the hint. That worked indeed. I've almost finished by now. I
>> only have to finish the adjustment for the changed CTM behaviour in
>> BlockViewports.
>>
>> On 25.02.2008 14:27:27 Adrian Cumiskey wrote:
>>> Hi Jeremias,
>>>
>>> I started to do this but if you prefer then be all means go ahead and revert yourself. The approach
>>> I took was to take a trunk checkout and then apply
>>>
>>> svn merge -r603590:603589 .
>>>
>>> This should give you all the changes between commits (as 603589 works ok, but 603590 is broken) and
>>> this should affect only the files in the 603590 commit you should keep all the new stuff in trunk.
>>>
>>> Adrian.
>>>
>>> Jeremias Maerki wrote:
>>>> FYI, I'm going to revert the AFP Renderer in Trunk to revision 601712
>>>> (the revision before 603590 (2007-12-12) which broke the AFP Renderer).
>>>> Obviously, I'll have to reapply some of the changes that were done
>>>> in the meantime (like the image integration or changes in
>>>> AbstractPathOrientedRenderer). I'll do this so I can prepare the 0.95
>>>> release candidate later this week without a broken AFP renderer.
>>>>
>>>> Adrian, please continue working on the branch you've created. We can
>>>> merge it back into Trunk when you've fixed the AFP Renderer with the
>>>> GOCA addition.
>>>>
>>>> Jeremias Maerki
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Jeremias Maerki
>>
>
>
>
>
> Jeremias Maerki
>
>
Re: Reverting changes in AFP Renderer
Posted by Jeremias Maerki <de...@jeremias-maerki.ch>.
Interesting. I just noticed that the break-out mechanism hasn't been
implemented for the AFP renderer and therefore fixed positioned
block-containers are not even supported in 0.94. Hmm. I guess I will
skip that then. I'm only hacking together the same feature level as in
0.94 anyway.
It turns out the AFP renderer has more in common with the PCL renderer
(no nested coordinate system mechanism is used) than with PDF/PS/Java2D
and still it's been derived from AbstractPathOrientedRenderer. I guess
this should be improved when the GOCA stuff is working again. I just
want the release done.
On 26.02.2008 10:53:01 Jeremias Maerki wrote:
> Thanks for the hint. That worked indeed. I've almost finished by now. I
> only have to finish the adjustment for the changed CTM behaviour in
> BlockViewports.
>
> On 25.02.2008 14:27:27 Adrian Cumiskey wrote:
> > Hi Jeremias,
> >
> > I started to do this but if you prefer then be all means go ahead and revert yourself. The approach
> > I took was to take a trunk checkout and then apply
> >
> > svn merge -r603590:603589 .
> >
> > This should give you all the changes between commits (as 603589 works ok, but 603590 is broken) and
> > this should affect only the files in the 603590 commit you should keep all the new stuff in trunk.
> >
> > Adrian.
> >
> > Jeremias Maerki wrote:
> > > FYI, I'm going to revert the AFP Renderer in Trunk to revision 601712
> > > (the revision before 603590 (2007-12-12) which broke the AFP Renderer).
> > > Obviously, I'll have to reapply some of the changes that were done
> > > in the meantime (like the image integration or changes in
> > > AbstractPathOrientedRenderer). I'll do this so I can prepare the 0.95
> > > release candidate later this week without a broken AFP renderer.
> > >
> > > Adrian, please continue working on the branch you've created. We can
> > > merge it back into Trunk when you've fixed the AFP Renderer with the
> > > GOCA addition.
> > >
> > > Jeremias Maerki
> > >
> > >
>
>
>
>
> Jeremias Maerki
>
Jeremias Maerki
Re: Reverting changes in AFP Renderer
Posted by Jeremias Maerki <de...@jeremias-maerki.ch>.
Thanks for the hint. That worked indeed. I've almost finished by now. I
only have to finish the adjustment for the changed CTM behaviour in
BlockViewports.
On 25.02.2008 14:27:27 Adrian Cumiskey wrote:
> Hi Jeremias,
>
> I started to do this but if you prefer then be all means go ahead and revert yourself. The approach
> I took was to take a trunk checkout and then apply
>
> svn merge -r603590:603589 .
>
> This should give you all the changes between commits (as 603589 works ok, but 603590 is broken) and
> this should affect only the files in the 603590 commit you should keep all the new stuff in trunk.
>
> Adrian.
>
> Jeremias Maerki wrote:
> > FYI, I'm going to revert the AFP Renderer in Trunk to revision 601712
> > (the revision before 603590 (2007-12-12) which broke the AFP Renderer).
> > Obviously, I'll have to reapply some of the changes that were done
> > in the meantime (like the image integration or changes in
> > AbstractPathOrientedRenderer). I'll do this so I can prepare the 0.95
> > release candidate later this week without a broken AFP renderer.
> >
> > Adrian, please continue working on the branch you've created. We can
> > merge it back into Trunk when you've fixed the AFP Renderer with the
> > GOCA addition.
> >
> > Jeremias Maerki
> >
> >
Jeremias Maerki
Re: Reverting changes in AFP Renderer
Posted by Adrian Cumiskey <ad...@gmail.com>.
Hi Jeremias,
I started to do this but if you prefer then be all means go ahead and revert yourself. The approach
I took was to take a trunk checkout and then apply
svn merge -r603590:603589 .
This should give you all the changes between commits (as 603589 works ok, but 603590 is broken) and
this should affect only the files in the 603590 commit you should keep all the new stuff in trunk.
Adrian.
Jeremias Maerki wrote:
> FYI, I'm going to revert the AFP Renderer in Trunk to revision 601712
> (the revision before 603590 (2007-12-12) which broke the AFP Renderer).
> Obviously, I'll have to reapply some of the changes that were done
> in the meantime (like the image integration or changes in
> AbstractPathOrientedRenderer). I'll do this so I can prepare the 0.95
> release candidate later this week without a broken AFP renderer.
>
> Adrian, please continue working on the branch you've created. We can
> merge it back into Trunk when you've fixed the AFP Renderer with the
> GOCA addition.
>
> Jeremias Maerki
>
>