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

[<jue...@we...>]

Darren,

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

Actually, I'd like to keep everything that we currently ship in the =
core, to provide a single comprehensive distribution package.

It's just about *further* dependencies for things that are not fully =
tested/reviewed yet or that we are not completely happy with. There =
probably will never be a clear line here: We'd have to decide on a =
case-by-cases basis what should go into the core or into the extension =
package.

FOP support should definitely go into the sandbox! People will use this =
and give further feedback on it. (We're lucky that we have quite a lot =
of "sandbox-aware" users!) I'd just like to defer adding it to the core =
for a while, until things have clarified a bit further.

Juergen


-----Original Message-----
From: spr...@li...
[mailto:spr...@li...]On Behalf
Of Darren Davison
Sent: Monday, October 04, 2004 3:02 PM
To: spr...@li...
Subject: Re: [Springframework-developer] XSL-FO (Apache-FOP)



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 =
should
> raise the size of the Spring core distribution with a further 1.3 MB =
jar file
> for such special functionality, in particular for a library that is =
still in
> 0.x (i.e. whose API is not guaranteed to stay stable). I'm a bit =
worried in
> that respect... Do you know what timeframe the next FOP major release =
is
> 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 =
projects
these days hugely overuse the 0.x versioning - particularly in the GNU =
space
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 =
that's
not really any different to other projects that we currently ship a =
dependency
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 =
useful
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 =
from
> 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' =
distro
(Velocity/FreeMarker/POI et al)?  I'm unsure how this works..

--=20
Darren Davison
Public Key: #DD356B0D




-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: IT Product Guide on ITManagersJournal
Use IT products in your business? Tell us what you think of them. Give =
us
Your Opinions, Get Free ThinkGeek Gift Certificates! Click to find out =
more
http://productguide.itmanagersjournal.com/guidepromo.tmpl
_______________________________________________
Springframework-developer mailing list
Spr...@li...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/springframework-developer