From: SourceForge.net <no...@so...> - 2004-11-18 18:08:18
|
Patches item #613993, was opened at 2002-09-24 22:17 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by scop You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=373749&aid=613993&group_id=21935 Category: DocBook XSL Group: Java extensions Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Submitted By: Ville Skyttä (scop) Assigned to: Michael Smith (xmldoc) Summary: JavaDoc fixes Initial Comment: This patch fixes some copy&pastos in the extension JavaDocs as well as updates Xalan2 and Saxon URLs. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Comment By: Ville Skyttä (scop) Date: 2004-11-18 20:08 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=32457 Thanks for your time and consideration. Regarding the version numbering scheme of the possible standalone package, I have no strong opinions as long as it keeps increasing at every release, and if possible, also at the transition (1.67.0 -> XXXX) time. I don't see any problems with the suggested single-number naming scheme; if you feel comfortable with it, just go ahead. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Michael Smith (xmldoc) Date: 2004-11-16 17:06 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=118135 Ville, Thanks for the reply. OK, based on your feedback, I guess that if/when we do that standalone release, it'll: - retain the same jar file names as in the build.xml file you included - not include Saxon 8 extensions (if those are released, I guess it would make sense to make them a separate docbook-xsl2-java package) - be version-numbered so as to not cause JPackage upgrade problems But about the last point: If we release the upstream package as a standalone package, I personally think it does not make any sense to version it with a four-digit version number like that of the docbook-xsl package. It's not necessary and worse yet, it is misleading in that it implies it is in sync somehow with the docbook-xsl versioning, which it won't be & need not be. What about numbering it using a simple single-digit numbering scheme, starting with, say, docbook-xsl-java-5 ? Will that be a problem? If so, can you please suggest a version-numbering convention that will work for you all? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Ville Skyttä (scop) Date: 2004-11-14 14:14 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=32457 Ok. In JPackage, we cannot rename the jars without providing backwards compatibility symlinks, and I don't actually see a compelling reason to rename the existing ones. How about just leaving the old ones as is, and just adding saxon8? By the way, we will most likely not be providing the saxon8 jar in JPackage, because Saxon 8 is not free software. I updated our docbook-xsl-java package to 1.67.0 yesterday, it's in the "devel" section and will be released soon, probably next week, along with the rest of JPackage distribution version 1.6. A separate package for the java extensions would be nice, but I'd like to ask you to not go backwards with the version number (current 1.67.0, new 1.5 as you suggested) as this will cause all sorts of upgrade problems that need special attention. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Michael Smith (xmldoc) Date: 2004-11-14 13:53 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=118135 Ville, I'll look at these patches and first apply in my sandbox without committing to CVS. Then, I will give you a standalone build of the extensions for Saxon 6 and Xalan 2. At that time, I'd like to ask you and whoever else from the JPackage project to check it and comment on it. I made some minor changes to your build.xml file. For one, I changed jar file names to docbook-xslt-saxon6.jar and docbook-xslt-xalan2.jar. Part of the reason is that Norm has added extensions for Saxon 8. So when those are released standalone, it seems like the name docbook-xslt2-saxon8.jar will make sense. I also added README, RELEASE-NOTES.html and RELEASE-NOTES.txt files and VERSION files. I have suggested to the DocBook project team that we start releasing the DocBook XSLT Java extensions as a separate package; if I get an OK from the team, we will probably do a docbook-xslt-java-1.5 release next week. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Ville Skyttä (scop) Date: 2004-11-13 16:07 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=32457 Here's an updated patch including more fixes. Please apply. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=373749&aid=613993&group_id=21935 |