Re: [Springframework-developer] XSL-FO (Apache-FOP)

[Darren D. <da...@da...>]

On Mon, October 4, 2004 13:13, j=FCrgen h=F6ller [werk3AT] said:
> Darren,
>
> While this is certainly a worthwhile extension, I'm not sure if we shou=
ld
> raise the size of the Spring core distribution with a further 1.3 MB ja=
r file
> for such special functionality, in particular for a library that is sti=
ll in
> 0.x (i.e. whose API is not guaranteed to stay stable). I'm a bit worrie=
d in
> that respect... Do you know what timeframe the next FOP major release i=
s
> scheduled for?

It's a big jar for such a small class, agreed.  But then again, 1.3Mb isn=
't
much on top of what is already a 26MB+ download.

The 0.x version is annoying, but also slightly misleading.  A lot of proj=
ects
these days hugely overuse the 0.x versioning - particularly in the GNU sp=
ace
where some software has been in production use for years (literally) and =
yet
still has a 0.x version number.  0.20.5 is a stable, supported branch of =
FOP.=20
The API *will* change in the rewrite (currently only available via CVS), =
see
http://xml.apache.org/fop/dev/index.html#lines for more info.  But then t=
hat's
not really any different to other projects that we currently ship a depen=
dency
for as they could change their API in the next major release.  Changes to=
 the
FOP API should be hidden within the View implementation in Spring and won=
't
affect end users.

I'm not overly concerned if it goes in the sandbox or not at all since it=
's
trivial to code it as an extension in my apps.  It just seemed like a use=
ful
addition that we needed anyway and others had already asked for.

Just my $0.02 - be interested to hear anyone else's.

> Thus, I suggest to put the FOP support classes into the sandbox for the=
 time
> being... like we do for Commons Validator and co. People will use it fr=
om
> there too, like they already do with the Commons Validator support and =
the
> Portlet stuff... We can always move it over once we agree that the time=
 is
> right. Another option would be to start shipping a separate extension
> distribution...
>
> Opinions? (both on FOP support and the extension distribution idea...)

would some of the currently core things then move into the 'extension' di=
stro
(Velocity/FreeMarker/POI et al)?  I'm unsure how this works..

--=20
Darren Davison
Public Key: #DD356B0D