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 Simon Pepping <sp...@leverkruid.nl> on 2005/11/18 21:29:37 UTC
Completeness of fop-0.90alpha1-src
I compared a newly built fop-0.90alpha1-src.zip with my source
directory from the repository. The following files are not in the
distribution zip file, while I think they should:
fop-0.90alpha1/KEYS
fop-0.90alpha1/lib/xalan.BCEL.LICENSE.txt
fop-0.90alpha1/lib/xalan.LICENSE.txt
fop-0.90alpha1/lib/xalan.NOTICE.txt
fop-0.90alpha1/lib/xalan.regexp.LICENSE.txt
fop-0.90alpha1/lib/xalan.runtime.LICENSE.txt
fop-0.90alpha1/status.xml
Simon
--
Simon Pepping
home page: http://www.leverkruid.nl
Re: Completeness of fop-0.90alpha1-src
Posted by Jeremias Maerki <de...@jeremias-maerki.ch>.
On 21.11.2005 10:48:24 Christian Geisert wrote:
> Jeremias Maerki schrieb:
> > On 20.11.2005 11:21:55 Christian Geisert wrote:
>
> [..]
>
> > Yes. I think they are necessary. To reduce the size of the 1.4 binary
> > distribution we could think about removing the XML-related JARs. But IMO
> > they don't hurt.
> >
> > What I don't get is the reason why you removed the javadocs from the
> > binary distribution. Users who download the binaries have no way to
> > build them themselves.
>
> They take up about ~2MB space and the old release didn't contain them
> too. IMHO those interrested can download the source and build them (we
> tell them how to dev/api-doc.html).
> But I'm ok with including them too.
I personally expect the javadocs to be present in a binary release. The
alternative is to publish a separate zip (fop-0.90alpha1-docs.zip) with
the docs/ and /javadocs directory and remove them from the binary
distribution.
> Uh, the link to online javadocs (build by Gump) doesn't work, I think we
> should provide them online in any case.
Yes, that's probably broken ever since Gump got their Solaris zone and
they moved to http://vmgump.apache.org. The problem is that they don't
seem to create the federated javadocs anymore. Or I just don't find them.
I'll see to it that we have them on our site.
Jeremias Maerki
Re: Completeness of fop-0.90alpha1-src
Posted by Christian Geisert <ch...@isu-gmbh.de>.
Jeremias Maerki schrieb:
> On 20.11.2005 11:21:55 Christian Geisert wrote:
[..]
> Yes. I think they are necessary. To reduce the size of the 1.4 binary
> distribution we could think about removing the XML-related JARs. But IMO
> they don't hurt.
>
> What I don't get is the reason why you removed the javadocs from the
> binary distribution. Users who download the binaries have no way to
> build them themselves.
They take up about ~2MB space and the old release didn't contain them
too. IMHO those interrested can download the source and build them (we
tell them how to dev/api-doc.html).
But I'm ok with including them too.
Uh, the link to online javadocs (build by Gump) doesn't work, I think we
should provide them online in any case.
--
Christian
Re: Completeness of fop-0.90alpha1-src
Posted by Jeremias Maerki <de...@jeremias-maerki.ch>.
On 20.11.2005 11:21:55 Christian Geisert wrote:
> Jeremias Maerki schrieb:
> > Ok, fixed, along with a few other things. Interesting how many little
> > things you can find that delay a release. :-)
> >
> > With the current build in the branch we are able to create the 3
> > distributions that I see are necessary:
> > - Source distribution
> > - Binary distribution for JDK 1.3
> > - Binary distribution for JDK 1.4 and later (containing support for
> > ImageIO)
>
> Ok, so we'll release three distributions? (just to make sure)
Yes. I think they are necessary. To reduce the size of the 1.4 binary
distribution we could think about removing the XML-related JARs. But IMO
they don't hurt.
What I don't get is the reason why you removed the javadocs from the
binary distribution. Users who download the binaries have no way to
build them themselves.
<snip/>
Jeremias Maerki
Re: Completeness of fop-0.90alpha1-src
Posted by Manuel Mall <mm...@arcus.com.au>.
On Sun, 20 Nov 2005 06:21 pm, Christian Geisert wrote:
> Jeremias Maerki schrieb:
<snip/>
> > With the current build in the branch we are able to create the 3
> > distributions that I see are necessary:
> > - Source distribution
> > - Binary distribution for JDK 1.3
> > - Binary distribution for JDK 1.4 and later (containing support for
> > ImageIO)
>
> Ok, so we'll release three distributions? (just to make sure)
>
Yes, that is my understanding too.
<snip/>
> Christian
Manuel
Re: Completeness of fop-0.90alpha1-src
Posted by Christian Geisert <ch...@isu-gmbh.de>.
Jeremias Maerki schrieb:
> Ok, fixed, along with a few other things. Interesting how many little
> things you can find that delay a release. :-)
>
> With the current build in the branch we are able to create the 3
> distributions that I see are necessary:
> - Source distribution
> - Binary distribution for JDK 1.3
> - Binary distribution for JDK 1.4 and later (containing support for
> ImageIO)
Ok, so we'll release three distributions? (just to make sure)
> To make a JDK 1.3 distribution build from scratch possible, add:
> javahome.jdk14 = <your jdk 1.4 home path here>
> to your build-local.properties. This enables build the docs while Ant
> runs under JDK 1.3 because Forrest needs JDK 1.4.
I just did a succesfull build with JDK1.3 (nice work Jeremias)
I'll do the release builds later today if nobody has objections.
Christian
Re: Completeness of fop-0.90alpha1-src
Posted by Jeremias Maerki <de...@jeremias-maerki.ch>.
Ok, fixed, along with a few other things. Interesting how many little
things you can find that delay a release. :-)
With the current build in the branch we are able to create the 3
distributions that I see are necessary:
- Source distribution
- Binary distribution for JDK 1.3
- Binary distribution for JDK 1.4 and later (containing support for
ImageIO)
To make a JDK 1.3 distribution build from scratch possible, add:
javahome.jdk14 = <your jdk 1.4 home path here>
to your build-local.properties. This enables build the docs while Ant
runs under JDK 1.3 because Forrest needs JDK 1.4.
On 18.11.2005 21:49:17 Jeremias Maerki wrote:
> Thanks, Simon. Good catch! I got that covered. Commit will follow
> shortly.
>
> On 18.11.2005 21:29:37 Simon Pepping wrote:
> > I compared a newly built fop-0.90alpha1-src.zip with my source
> > directory from the repository. The following files are not in the
> > distribution zip file, while I think they should:
> >
> > fop-0.90alpha1/KEYS
> > fop-0.90alpha1/lib/xalan.BCEL.LICENSE.txt
> > fop-0.90alpha1/lib/xalan.LICENSE.txt
> > fop-0.90alpha1/lib/xalan.NOTICE.txt
> > fop-0.90alpha1/lib/xalan.regexp.LICENSE.txt
> > fop-0.90alpha1/lib/xalan.runtime.LICENSE.txt
> > fop-0.90alpha1/status.xml
> >
> > Simon
> >
> > --
> > Simon Pepping
> > home page: http://www.leverkruid.nl
>
>
>
> Jeremias Maerki
Jeremias Maerki
Re: Completeness of fop-0.90alpha1-src
Posted by Jeremias Maerki <de...@jeremias-maerki.ch>.
Thanks, Simon. Good catch! I got that covered. Commit will follow
shortly.
On 18.11.2005 21:29:37 Simon Pepping wrote:
> I compared a newly built fop-0.90alpha1-src.zip with my source
> directory from the repository. The following files are not in the
> distribution zip file, while I think they should:
>
> fop-0.90alpha1/KEYS
> fop-0.90alpha1/lib/xalan.BCEL.LICENSE.txt
> fop-0.90alpha1/lib/xalan.LICENSE.txt
> fop-0.90alpha1/lib/xalan.NOTICE.txt
> fop-0.90alpha1/lib/xalan.regexp.LICENSE.txt
> fop-0.90alpha1/lib/xalan.runtime.LICENSE.txt
> fop-0.90alpha1/status.xml
>
> Simon
>
> --
> Simon Pepping
> home page: http://www.leverkruid.nl
Jeremias Maerki