Re: Re : Proposition of donation of a PDF/A validator to the PDFBox project

[Guillaume Bailleul <gb...@gmail.com>]

On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 11:30 PM, Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Guillaume,
>
> [cc += private@pdfbox, though I suggest that we follow up on the
> general bits on dev@pdfbox]


Done

>
> On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 3:36 PM, Guillaume Bailleul
> <gb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Some news from PaDaF front :-)
>
> Great!
>
> > Atos Worldline, our company, already has a CCLA for other commiters. Do you
> > have a way to check that ?
>
> Yes, I can see the CCLA on file.
>
> > The three developpers of padaf are :
> > Eric Leleu
> > Germain Costenobel
> > Guillaume Bailleul
> > Normally, ICLA were sent. Can it be checked ?
>
> I don't yet see a record of those ICLAs being received. When/how were they sent?
>
> It would be good if your company also sent an update to the CCLA
> schedule A that included you three as new contributors.


I will check that point, it should have been done.


>
> > About the software grant, I had the response of our legal counsel and I just
> > found the good chief executive. You can find it attached to this mail. If it
> > looks OK for you, do you know where I should send it ?
>
> Looks good in general, though it would be better if the grant
> referenced an exact set of bits, like the MD5 or SHA1 checksum of a
> tarball attached to a related PaDaF issue in the PDFBox issue tracker.
> For example, here's the grant text used by my employer on a previous
> contribution: "Set of 'bundle persistence manager' components for
> Apache Jackrabbit, attached to
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-755 as JCR-755.patch.gz (MD5
> checksum a8accf17e35d1dec52fb4fcc277bb9e)."
>

OK, I will append that when the ball will be ready


> > Now I have some questions about the first version of sources :
> > - compilation target is only java 5 ?
>
> Yes, that's what we currently use in PDFBox.
>
> > - do you know a simple way to replace header in all source files ? do we put
> > the same header than in pdfbox ?
>
> There are some scripts for doing header replacements, but I've found
> that unless you're talking about thousands of source files, it's
> usually best to do such work manually or at most semi-automatically,
> since you'll have a better chance t spot and fix any irregularities or
> errors. All work covered by the software grant should use the same
> Apache header as the one we use in PDFBox. See
> http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html for more details.

Not talking of thousands but about 250 files :-)
We will find something.

>
> > - do we rename the package before ? what should be a good name :
> > org.apache.pdfbox.padaf ?
>
> Like the header replacements, package renaming is a relatively
> technical operation that can be done either before or after the IP
> clearance process. By Apache policy we should use org.apache.* package
> names. The proposed org.apache.pdfbox.padaf sounds good, or we could
> also do org.apache.padaf assuming we want to keep PaDaF as a separate
> component like we now do with JempBox and FontBox.

Sounds OK for me :
org.apache.padaf.preflight
org.apache.padaf.xmpbox

>
> > - are there other important points for the first version ? maybe a document
> > explains all that ?
>
> The legal process is mostly explained in [1] and my previous posts.
> And as for the actual code, the best way is to simply start with what
> you already have and get that included in PDFBox as-is. We can then
> start looking at possible changes and improvements together.
>
> [1] http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/ip-clearance-template.html
>

Thank you,

So next step on source code :
I have some patches to insert before forking on github.
We will work on that fork to prepare the initial tarball.
I think it should be quite quick


> BR,
>
> Jukka Zitting

Cordialement,

Guillaume