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 Keiron Liddle <ke...@aftexsw.com> on 2002/02/05 15:54:56 UTC
Re: Seeking Comments on Status of Project
As far as using FOP it is still in the early development stages. So you
can evaluate it and use it if it is good enough for your needs. Due to the
missing features and bugs etc. it is harder to evaluate and may be a
problem if you want to extend how you use it.
In terms of the current development status. I would say that there needs
to be more people invloved and at the current progress it is still a long
way from being completed. Part of the problem seems to be that to
implement even a simple fo feature there is still a lot of other code to
do. Another problem is the lack of effort around all the other important
areas: website, docs, images etc.
The only thing that will improve FOP is more people doing something
positive even if it is small.
Regards,
Keiron Liddle
On 2002.01.25 00:12 ptribulski@chubb.com wrote:
> First off, thank you for what looks like a fantastic effort. I admire
> (and
> am envious of) each of you who have found the time to contribute to such
> a
> valuable project.
>
> I am involved with the approval process for bringing new technology into
> our company. We have several development groups who have seen the FOP
> engine and would like to include it their applications. The requirements
> are pretty much the same across applications. They need to generate lots
> of
> short dynamic documents in PDF (lots=500-1000 per day, short=1-20 pages,
> mostly text, some tables). Some of the applications need to support
> unicode or double-byte languages.
>
> On the surface, I agree that FOP looks like the right answer for what
> they
> need. However, I also need to ensure that we follow our guidelines for
> technology acquisition.
>
> One of our primary tenets is "no beta software should be included in
> production applications".
>
> I have read through many posts in the mail list and appreciate the
> honesty
> and clarity about the current status.
> Back in January of 2001 and again in July 2001, Arved Sandstrom pointed
> out
> that FOP is still a development effort.
> With this message, I am hoping I can persuade one of the committers to
> provide a "January 2002" update on the status.
> I have found the occasional status messages very useful, hopefully any
> response to this message on the archive will help others in the future.
>
> Here is a snippet from the July 2001 post by Arved:
>
> >> FOP developers and committers have never suggested that the processor
> is
> >> anything other than a work in progress. My best guess is that if we
> have
> a
> >> production release by the end of the year then we'll be doing well.
> Alpha is
> >> a long ways away.
>
> Is this still the case? I am making an assumption that the version
> number
> speaks to the status (v0.x is "pre-release").
> Is the version numbering a reflection of:
> A. Still early in development
> B. Indication of how completely the XSL:FO spec is implemented
> C. A combination of both
>
> I also in various places reference to RC (Release Candidate) versions. It
> seems that currently v0.20.1 is the latest "stable" release (no
> implication
> intended by "stable" - I just think I saw that phrasing somewhere
> associated with v0.20.1).
> If possible, could someone clarify the intention/meaning of the x.yy.zz
> version scheme.
> (I am guessing that x is major production release, yy is a change to what
> is supported, and zz is for minor changes / patches.)
>
> I see some notes about the inclusion of jfor (RTF output) into the FOP
> project. I think that would be really cool, and speaks very well of the
> effort put in thus far. Anyone care to comment on when that may make it
> into a release?
>
> On a somewhat related note, any updated comments on the following would
> be
> appreciated.
> I have seen several posts that recommend Renderx XEP if you "need
> production level code". Is that still the case?
> Sometime ago, Renderx apparently put a feature comparison up on their
> site,
> but since removed it (concerns of bias, etc).
> I have seen references to things like "look for independent comparisons".
> Has anyone seen a recent comparison? I can not find one (though I
> understand time is better spent refining the code than dedicating
> resources
> to run comparisons).
>
> Thanks in advance for any responses,
>
> Pete Tribulski
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: fop-dev-help@xml.apache.org
Working on an Open Source Project was RE: Seeking Comments on
Status of Project
Posted by ewitness - Ben Fowler <bf...@ewitness.co.uk>.
> > So what is your point?
>>
>> - that we need a whole lot more people working on this. We already know,
> > either people will volunteer or they won't.
> > - that you don't know how to help. You said you can see problems. Tell us
> > you are going to fix those problems. Then do it.
>
>Well, now that I consider it more, I have to say that I guess I am just
>used to a "corporate" way of developing software that has a definite
>administrative structure and plan of action with people assigned specific
>tasks. Since I've never worked on an Open Source project, it justs seems
>sort of anarchistic to me. Maybe it'll be fun -- it justs seems like a
>lot of code, documentation, and examples to just jump into.
There is some introductory guidance on this, exempli gratia:
<URL: http://www.advogato.org/article/429.html >
<URL: http://www.linuxdoc.org/HOWTO/Software-Release-Practice-HOWTO/ >
<URL: http://www.kbasic.org/1/join.php3 >
<URL: http://www.newsforge.com/article.pl?sid=01/07/11/185221 >
<URL: http://www.mozilla.org/hacking/ >
Though Mozilla is more organised and disciplined than
a lot of OS developers prefer
<URL: http://www.tuxedo.org/~esr/faqs/hacker-howto.html >
This may be a bit too general.
<URL:
http://www2.abisource.com/mailinglists/abiword-dev/99/December/0264.html >
This contains the single best description of how not to
look out of place on an OS project, really the OS Initiative
<URL: http://www.opensource.org/ > ought to be invited to
get the authors permission <Paul Rohr (paul@abisource.com) >
and place a version of it somewhere on their site.
Ben.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: fop-dev-help@xml.apache.org
Re: Seeking Comments on Status of Project
Posted by "Peter B. West" <pb...@powerup.com.au>.
Matthew L. Avizinis wrote:
>
>Well, now that I consider it more, I have to say that I guess I am just used
>to a "corporate" way of developing software that has a definite
>administrative structure and plan of action with people assigned specific
>tasks. Since I've never worked on an Open Source project, it justs seems
>sort of anarchistic to me.
>
Bingo! If you read Eric Raymond, you will find that he likes to quote
from Prince Kropotkin, one of the heavyweights of C19 Russian Anarchism.
Welcome to the bazaar.
> Maybe it'll be fun -- it justs seems like a lot
>of code, documentation, and examples to just jump into.
>
It is, on both counts.
Peter
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: fop-dev-help@xml.apache.org
fop hangs
Posted by Eugene Nedzvetsky <eu...@ibis.odessa.ua>.
Hello All
FOP hangs on attached file.
RE: Seeking Comments on Status of Project
Posted by "Matthew L. Avizinis" <ml...@gleim.com>.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Keiron Liddle [mailto:keiron@aftexsw.com]
> Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2002 4:05 AM
> To: fop-dev@xml.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Seeking Comments on Status of Project
>
>
>
> So what is your point?
>
> - that we need a whole lot more people working on this. We already know,
> either people will volunteer or they won't.
> - that you don't know how to help. You said you can see problems. Tell us
> you are going to fix those problems. Then do it.
Well, now that I consider it more, I have to say that I guess I am just used
to a "corporate" way of developing software that has a definite
administrative structure and plan of action with people assigned specific
tasks. Since I've never worked on an Open Source project, it justs seems
sort of anarchistic to me. Maybe it'll be fun -- it justs seems like a lot
of code, documentation, and examples to just jump into.
> - that we need: coders, project coordinator, documenters, testers,
> examples etc.
> - we need deadlines, timetables, that only works when the other
> things are
> in order
> - upto date progress on everything. I would estimate that would take 60%
> of the time under the current circumstances, do you want things to take
> 2.5 times longer.
>
> The only conclusion I can make is that I made the website look too good
> (or inappropriate). People seem to think that we have the resources of
> projects with 20-500 times the people.
> Since we cannot manage the resources then we should manage user
> expectation better.
>
> Here is what you will do over the next week:
> go to - http://xml.apache.org/fop/todo.html
> in cvs - docs/xml-docs/fop/todo.xml
> and update it to reflect the current priorities
> work out what other people will do
> what people need
> how and in what order
> you can use the archives and the mailing list (if you want me to answer
> questions I need to see that you are making a net positive contribution)
>
>
>
> On 2002.02.06 19:36 Matthew L. Avizinis wrote:
> > OK, so how can I help?
> > I am not what could be called by most standards a "professionally
> > competent"
> > Java programmer yet. However, I agree that documentation is
> lacking -- I
> > noticed that many, or at least some, of the Help documents in the
> > distribution have not been updated since 1999 (or if they have been,
> > -last
> > edited- date and by whom have not been).
> > I am attempting to use FOP for my company's publishing work
> flow - source
> > content to pdf, html, and mySQL database text blobs. It's a great
> > product,
> > considering that XEP costs >=$5,000, but frustrating in that Help is not
> > always (or has ever been?) up to date with the current release.
> > I might be able to squeeze in an hour or two a week for something deemed
> > useful by someone in charge.
> > Btw, who's in charge? It doesn't seem clear to me.
> >
> > And reluctantly, but while I'm at it, what the hey (certainly Keiron's
> > always very patient comments didn't provoke the following), (everyone is
> > entitled to a little ranting now and then, yes?):
> > And why does it seem that those folks working on this project seem so
> > against stating what their goals for when they want to complete certain
> > stages of development, i.e. "it'll be done when it's done" is
> frankly not
> > what I'd expect to here from a professional, even if they are only
> > programming on their free time. If you expect "users" to use the
> > product,
> > not just hobbyist's or programming guru's, then you've got to be more
> > forthcoming with what the development plan is. At least then, if you
> > don't
> > meet it, you can identify why and then set a new, more realistic goal.
> > Finally, one thing FOP should have is an upto date page identifying all
> > the
> > elements, attributes, and attribute values that are supported. For
> > instance, how long is keep-with-next going to remain "(broken)" on the
> > website, when it clearly is implemented at least partially with tables?
> > If
> > you need someone to do it, just tell me how and I'll get about it.
> > As to feature requests -- not everyone is a programmer, in fact most
> > people
> > are "users", so not everyone can "volunteer" to implement something.
> > Maybe
> > it's not the best example, but when I use MSWord and it has a defect, I
> > don't volunteer to fix it; I expect MS to do it. I just want to use the
> > product (commercial or not) to make my other development efforts easier.
> > On
> > the other hand, I know the active developers have much to do.
> So rather,
> > than brush people off with "do I here you volunteering", create a public
> > "wish list" or to-do list or whatever you want to call it.
> > I know the type of comments this will probably generate around
> here about
> > this being Open Source, and there being too few developers. Sure, I
> > understand all that. But a plain 'ol user has certain performance
> > expectations. I doubt that mySQL would enjoy the popularity it does
> > today,
> > if developers didn't meet user expectations (granted, there are far more
> > people working on it, but I hope you get my point).
> > Well, I've had my sayso, and I feel better. Now I can calm down again.
> > :-)
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
> For additional commands, email: fop-dev-help@xml.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: fop-dev-help@xml.apache.org
Re: Seeking Comments on Status of Project
Posted by Keiron Liddle <ke...@aftexsw.com>.
So what is your point?
- that we need a whole lot more people working on this. We already know,
either people will volunteer or they won't.
- that you don't know how to help. You said you can see problems. Tell us
you are going to fix those problems. Then do it.
- that we need: coders, project coordinator, documenters, testers,
examples etc.
- we need deadlines, timetables, that only works when the other things are
in order
- upto date progress on everything. I would estimate that would take 60%
of the time under the current circumstances, do you want things to take
2.5 times longer.
The only conclusion I can make is that I made the website look too good
(or inappropriate). People seem to think that we have the resources of
projects with 20-500 times the people.
Since we cannot manage the resources then we should manage user
expectation better.
Here is what you will do over the next week:
go to - http://xml.apache.org/fop/todo.html
in cvs - docs/xml-docs/fop/todo.xml
and update it to reflect the current priorities
work out what other people will do
what people need
how and in what order
you can use the archives and the mailing list (if you want me to answer
questions I need to see that you are making a net positive contribution)
On 2002.02.06 19:36 Matthew L. Avizinis wrote:
> OK, so how can I help?
> I am not what could be called by most standards a "professionally
> competent"
> Java programmer yet. However, I agree that documentation is lacking -- I
> noticed that many, or at least some, of the Help documents in the
> distribution have not been updated since 1999 (or if they have been,
> -last
> edited- date and by whom have not been).
> I am attempting to use FOP for my company's publishing work flow - source
> content to pdf, html, and mySQL database text blobs. It's a great
> product,
> considering that XEP costs >=$5,000, but frustrating in that Help is not
> always (or has ever been?) up to date with the current release.
> I might be able to squeeze in an hour or two a week for something deemed
> useful by someone in charge.
> Btw, who's in charge? It doesn't seem clear to me.
>
> And reluctantly, but while I'm at it, what the hey (certainly Keiron's
> always very patient comments didn't provoke the following), (everyone is
> entitled to a little ranting now and then, yes?):
> And why does it seem that those folks working on this project seem so
> against stating what their goals for when they want to complete certain
> stages of development, i.e. "it'll be done when it's done" is frankly not
> what I'd expect to here from a professional, even if they are only
> programming on their free time. If you expect "users" to use the
> product,
> not just hobbyist's or programming guru's, then you've got to be more
> forthcoming with what the development plan is. At least then, if you
> don't
> meet it, you can identify why and then set a new, more realistic goal.
> Finally, one thing FOP should have is an upto date page identifying all
> the
> elements, attributes, and attribute values that are supported. For
> instance, how long is keep-with-next going to remain "(broken)" on the
> website, when it clearly is implemented at least partially with tables?
> If
> you need someone to do it, just tell me how and I'll get about it.
> As to feature requests -- not everyone is a programmer, in fact most
> people
> are "users", so not everyone can "volunteer" to implement something.
> Maybe
> it's not the best example, but when I use MSWord and it has a defect, I
> don't volunteer to fix it; I expect MS to do it. I just want to use the
> product (commercial or not) to make my other development efforts easier.
> On
> the other hand, I know the active developers have much to do. So rather,
> than brush people off with "do I here you volunteering", create a public
> "wish list" or to-do list or whatever you want to call it.
> I know the type of comments this will probably generate around here about
> this being Open Source, and there being too few developers. Sure, I
> understand all that. But a plain 'ol user has certain performance
> expectations. I doubt that mySQL would enjoy the popularity it does
> today,
> if developers didn't meet user expectations (granted, there are far more
> people working on it, but I hope you get my point).
> Well, I've had my sayso, and I feel better. Now I can calm down again.
> :-)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: fop-dev-help@xml.apache.org
Re: Seeking Comments on Status of Project
Posted by Cyril Rognon <cr...@objectiva.fr>.
I think you are right Keiron,
I would like to contribute to this software, I would of course like to
begin with the code that is an issue for me but I am ready to hear where to
look and what to do either in the maintenance branch or in the redesign one.
(For the story, my fop issues are with multipage table eating too much memory)
At 15:54 05/02/2002 +0100, you wrote:
>The only thing that will improve FOP is more people doing something
>positive even if it is small.
>
>Regards,
>Keiron Liddle
Cyril Rognon
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: fop-dev-help@xml.apache.org
Re: Seeking Comments on Status of Project
Posted by Jeremias Maerki <je...@outline.ch>.
> To make sure there is no confusion about this, could someone clarify
> (once more I guess) what exactly the "main" and "maintenance" branches
> are, and how to get the source code for both of them?
You get the main branch by getting the sources from CVS without a tag.
The maintenance branch is extracted by using the tag
"fop-0_20_2-maintain". So the maintenance branch is where bugfixing is
done for versions 0.20.2 and later. The redesign is done on the main
branch.
Cheers,
Jeremias Märki
mailto:jeremias.maerki@outline.ch
OUTLINE AG
Postfach 3954 - Rhynauerstr. 15 - CH-6002 Luzern
Fon +41 41 317 20 20 - Fax +41 41 317 20 29
Internet http://www.outline.ch
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: fop-dev-help@xml.apache.org
Re: Seeking Comments on Status of Project
Posted by Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@codeconsult.ch>.
On Thursday 07 February 2002 03:57, Arved Sandstrom wrote:
>. . .
> If you do some code and want to
> see it added to the main or maintenance branches, then the onus is on
> one or more committers to explain why it's a bad idea, but there must
> be a good reason.
>. . .
To make sure there is no confusion about this, could someone clarify
(once more I guess) what exactly the "main" and "maintenance" branches
are, and how to get the source code for both of them?
- Bertrand
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: fop-dev-help@xml.apache.org
RE: Seeking Comments on Status of Project
Posted by Arved Sandstrom <Ar...@chebucto.ns.ca>.
-----Original Message-----
From: Peter B. West [mailto:pbwest@powerup.com.au]
Sent: February 6, 2002 8:32 PM
To: fop-dev@xml.apache.org
Subject: Re: Seeking Comments on Status of Project
> As to who's in charge: Arved is the man, but Arved has recently started
> a new job, so you can imagine what his current situation is.
> Nonetheless, he is preparing a new maintenance release at this time.
If we follow a convention of calling the release coordinator "da man", then
maybe that's been me. :-) But the last 6 months for sure I'd give high marks
to Keiron & Karen for championing the redesign, and both have done much work
besides - tables a la Karen, and a plethora of stuff for Keiron.
And FWIW Peter's been quite active himself. But I'm not going to go further
down that road because I am constantly impressed by the number of other
folks that are knowledgeable about aspects of FOP and volunteer their time.
So if I start mentioning names I'll leave worthy people out.
BTW, Christian Geisert is going to be doing the lion's share of this release
(the 0.20.3 final) so I guess that makes _him_ the man. He is our newest
committer and I'm glad to see him diving in. :-)
> He is also concurrently involved in the design of the C/C++ version.
To be precise, as much as the recent turmoil on the employment front has
permitted (laid off at the end of October, immediately started 2-month
contract, then started with Hummingbird 6 weeks ago) I jave been doing Perl
prototyping in support of my xslfo-proc Sourceforge project. I hope to have
that uploaded before the end of February.
It may seem that if I have enough time to work on that then I ought to be
able to work on FOP - that's not the case. Number one, I don't think the
maintenance branch merits intensive work. The kind of stuff FOP needs now
requires the redesign. And I simply do not have the _large_ amount of time
required to wrap my head around what Keiron and Karen are doing - I am
waiting for the bare essentials to get completed. And my intention with
xslfo-proc is to eventually, once the C++ engine is in good shape, and SWIG
wrappers in place, to possibly fold it back into FOP.
I guess the main observation I would make is that nobody, not committers and
not regular developers, need permission from anyone to start aggressively
working on stuff. If you do some code and want to see it added to the main
or maintenance branches, then the onus is on one or more committers to
explain why it's a bad idea, but there must be a good reason. At this stage
I'd rather see a lot of people getting intimate with the code - old or new
(preferably new) and just trying things.
I'll see if I can't peel off some time in support of what Peter is
suggesting, re tutorials or workshops, to help out Keiron and Karen. No
promises but I will certainly try.
Regards,
Arved Sandstrom
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: fop-dev-help@xml.apache.org
Re: Seeking Comments on Status of Project
Posted by "Peter B. West" <pb...@powerup.com.au>.
Matthew,
Yes, we're all entitled to a little ranting now and then. So I'll rant
a little, and end with a few practical suggestions.
As to who's in charge: Arved is the man, but Arved has recently started
a new job, so you can imagine what his current situation is.
Nonetheless, he is preparing a new maintenance release at this time.
He is also concurrently involved in the design of the C/C++ version.
Keiron is leading the redesign effort against the current code base
with Karen heavily involved. Tore is the reference for all things
fontish. That group is our active expertise on the current and
immediate future code base. There are others who have worked on the
code and documentation, e.g. Kelly and of course James Tauber, but who
are not currently active. Bernard is the rtf guru, and he is looking at
the integration of his rtf work into the project. My apologies to those
I have missed. I am looking at some alternative ways to approach the
design, and that, as far as current users are concerned, makes me
completely useless.
Given that the available time of contributors is limited, and that that
availability can change dramatically and unpredictably, mapping out
timetables is a demoralising business. It has been attempted, but the
actual results have varied so far from the predicted that I think we are
all gun-shy. A large part of the difficulty is that this particular
problem has not been solved by this group before. In that sense it is
uncharted territory. I saw an old movie about Christopher Columbus a
while ago. He is back in the Spanish court and one of his enemies makes
disparaging remarks about what a trivial matter it is to sail to the New
World. Frederick March (Columbus) picks up a boiled egg and asks the
bloke if he knows how to stand the egg on its end. The guy and the King
and a few others attempt to balance the egg, unsuccessfully. Columbus
raps the blunter end on the table, crushing the air sac, and stands the
egg on the crushed base. "It's easy when someone shows you how."
Your comments about the relationship of the users to the makers are not
*entirely* fair. Yes, users are entitled to expect that bugs and
lacunae in the product will be fixed, without being told to "do it
yourself." Without non-participating users an Open Source project
cannot expect to be very widely used. We need to know about user's
requirements, and this group has made great efforts over the time that I
have been involved to respond to those requirements. However, to demand
that we display a level of "professionalism" (a word I always put in
scare quotes) that I don't see from large software companies, including
MS, is a bit unfair.
This project has a well-defined goal: a fully confomant product ASAP.
We are at a stage of re-definition. As has been stated on many
occasions, the existing design has exhausted its usefulness, and
requires a serious rethink. The result has to be capable of realising
the afore-mentioned goal. That takes time. When it is completed, a map
of sub-goals and sub-projects can be drawn up, and a vaguely useful
timetable might be possible. Keiron and Karen are the primary
references for this, and if they are not drawing up such a roadmap, I
expect it is because they are still struggling to subdue the design.
Keiron has indicated his interest in running some kind of school or
seminar on the redesign for those who are interested, and I hope this
comes to fruition. Keiron is committed to building on as much of the
current base as possible, so I expect that we will learn a lot about
that base. This will, I think, be important for moving the project
forward. Some of you will have noticed that the current CVS branch does
not do a lot. We need to begin to fill in those gaps, under direction
from K&K. If you want to help to increase the coverage of FOP, this
will be the way to go. Keiron and Karen will need to mark out a number
of places to which the toe of the crowbar can be usefully applied, and
then talk people up to speed.
We need some documenters to maintain and extend the web pages, and to do
more detailed documentation on the design and implementation. I would
hope that we could have two or three active in this area. The prime
responsibility would be the web pages. I would imagine that one of the
documenters would do all of the web page committing, but would keep the
others up to date on all of the changes. If he were unable to continue
with that responsibility, temporarily or permanently, a handover could
be arranged within the documenters' group, and if necessary, a call
could be issued for a replacement member or members. A fop-documenters
mailing list may be appropriate.
Peter
Matthew L. Avizinis wrote:
>OK, so how can I help?
>
...
>Btw, who's in charge? It doesn't seem clear to me.
>
>And reluctantly, but while I'm at it, what the hey (certainly Keiron's
>always very patient comments didn't provoke the following), (everyone is
>entitled to a little ranting now and then, yes?):
>
...
>Well, I've had my sayso, and I feel better. Now I can calm down again. :-)
>
>thanks all for your consideration,
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: fop-dev-help@xml.apache.org
RE: Seeking Comments on Status of Project
Posted by "Matthew L. Avizinis" <ml...@gleim.com>.
OK, so how can I help?
I am not what could be called by most standards a "professionally competent"
Java programmer yet. However, I agree that documentation is lacking -- I
noticed that many, or at least some, of the Help documents in the
distribution have not been updated since 1999 (or if they have been, -last
edited- date and by whom have not been).
I am attempting to use FOP for my company's publishing work flow - source
content to pdf, html, and mySQL database text blobs. It's a great product,
considering that XEP costs >=$5,000, but frustrating in that Help is not
always (or has ever been?) up to date with the current release.
I might be able to squeeze in an hour or two a week for something deemed
useful by someone in charge.
Btw, who's in charge? It doesn't seem clear to me.
And reluctantly, but while I'm at it, what the hey (certainly Keiron's
always very patient comments didn't provoke the following), (everyone is
entitled to a little ranting now and then, yes?):
And why does it seem that those folks working on this project seem so
against stating what their goals for when they want to complete certain
stages of development, i.e. "it'll be done when it's done" is frankly not
what I'd expect to here from a professional, even if they are only
programming on their free time. If you expect "users" to use the product,
not just hobbyist's or programming guru's, then you've got to be more
forthcoming with what the development plan is. At least then, if you don't
meet it, you can identify why and then set a new, more realistic goal.
Finally, one thing FOP should have is an upto date page identifying all the
elements, attributes, and attribute values that are supported. For
instance, how long is keep-with-next going to remain "(broken)" on the
website, when it clearly is implemented at least partially with tables? If
you need someone to do it, just tell me how and I'll get about it.
As to feature requests -- not everyone is a programmer, in fact most people
are "users", so not everyone can "volunteer" to implement something. Maybe
it's not the best example, but when I use MSWord and it has a defect, I
don't volunteer to fix it; I expect MS to do it. I just want to use the
product (commercial or not) to make my other development efforts easier. On
the other hand, I know the active developers have much to do. So rather,
than brush people off with "do I here you volunteering", create a public
"wish list" or to-do list or whatever you want to call it.
I know the type of comments this will probably generate around here about
this being Open Source, and there being too few developers. Sure, I
understand all that. But a plain 'ol user has certain performance
expectations. I doubt that mySQL would enjoy the popularity it does today,
if developers didn't meet user expectations (granted, there are far more
people working on it, but I hope you get my point).
Well, I've had my sayso, and I feel better. Now I can calm down again. :-)
thanks all for your consideration,
Matthew L. Avizinis <ma...@gleim.com>
Gleim Publications, Inc.
4201 NW 95th Blvd.
Gainesville, FL 32606
(352)-375-0772 ext. 101
www.gleim.com <http://www.gleim.com>
=======================================================================
com·put·ing (kum' pyoot ing)
1. n the art of calculating how much time you wasted and money you spent in
a doomed attempt to master a machine with a mind of it's own. --from
computing: A HACKER'S DICTIONARY
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Keiron Liddle [mailto:keiron@aftexsw.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2002 9:55 AM
> To: fop-dev@xml.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Seeking Comments on Status of Project
>
>
>
> As far as using FOP it is still in the early development stages. So you
> can evaluate it and use it if it is good enough for your needs.
> Due to the
> missing features and bugs etc. it is harder to evaluate and may be a
> problem if you want to extend how you use it.
>
> In terms of the current development status. I would say that there needs
> to be more people invloved and at the current progress it is still a long
> way from being completed. Part of the problem seems to be that to
> implement even a simple fo feature there is still a lot of other code to
> do. Another problem is the lack of effort around all the other important
> areas: website, docs, images etc.
>
> The only thing that will improve FOP is more people doing something
> positive even if it is small.
>
> Regards,
> Keiron Liddle
>
> On 2002.01.25 00:12 ptribulski@chubb.com wrote:
> > First off, thank you for what looks like a fantastic effort. I admire
> > (and
> > am envious of) each of you who have found the time to contribute to such
> > a
> > valuable project.
> >
> > I am involved with the approval process for bringing new technology into
> > our company. We have several development groups who have seen the FOP
> > engine and would like to include it their applications. The requirements
> > are pretty much the same across applications. They need to generate lots
> > of
> > short dynamic documents in PDF (lots=500-1000 per day, short=1-20 pages,
> > mostly text, some tables). Some of the applications need to support
> > unicode or double-byte languages.
> >
> > On the surface, I agree that FOP looks like the right answer for what
> > they
> > need. However, I also need to ensure that we follow our guidelines for
> > technology acquisition.
> >
> > One of our primary tenets is "no beta software should be included in
> > production applications".
> >
> > I have read through many posts in the mail list and appreciate the
> > honesty
> > and clarity about the current status.
> > Back in January of 2001 and again in July 2001, Arved Sandstrom pointed
> > out
> > that FOP is still a development effort.
> > With this message, I am hoping I can persuade one of the committers to
> > provide a "January 2002" update on the status.
> > I have found the occasional status messages very useful, hopefully any
> > response to this message on the archive will help others in the future.
> >
> > Here is a snippet from the July 2001 post by Arved:
> >
> > >> FOP developers and committers have never suggested that the processor
> > is
> > >> anything other than a work in progress. My best guess is that if we
> > have
> > a
> > >> production release by the end of the year then we'll be doing well.
> > Alpha is
> > >> a long ways away.
> >
> > Is this still the case? I am making an assumption that the version
> > number
> > speaks to the status (v0.x is "pre-release").
> > Is the version numbering a reflection of:
> > A. Still early in development
> > B. Indication of how completely the XSL:FO spec is implemented
> > C. A combination of both
> >
> > I also in various places reference to RC (Release Candidate)
> versions. It
> > seems that currently v0.20.1 is the latest "stable" release (no
> > implication
> > intended by "stable" - I just think I saw that phrasing somewhere
> > associated with v0.20.1).
> > If possible, could someone clarify the intention/meaning of the x.yy.zz
> > version scheme.
> > (I am guessing that x is major production release, yy is a
> change to what
> > is supported, and zz is for minor changes / patches.)
> >
> > I see some notes about the inclusion of jfor (RTF output) into the FOP
> > project. I think that would be really cool, and speaks very well of the
> > effort put in thus far. Anyone care to comment on when that may make it
> > into a release?
> >
> > On a somewhat related note, any updated comments on the following would
> > be
> > appreciated.
> > I have seen several posts that recommend Renderx XEP if you "need
> > production level code". Is that still the case?
> > Sometime ago, Renderx apparently put a feature comparison up on their
> > site,
> > but since removed it (concerns of bias, etc).
> > I have seen references to things like "look for independent
> comparisons".
> > Has anyone seen a recent comparison? I can not find one (though I
> > understand time is better spent refining the code than dedicating
> > resources
> > to run comparisons).
> >
> > Thanks in advance for any responses,
> >
> > Pete Tribulski
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
> For additional commands, email: fop-dev-help@xml.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: fop-dev-help@xml.apache.org