Re: Ready for release?

On 22.01.2007 12:31:57 Cameron McCormack wrote:
> Hi Jeremias.
> 
> Jeremias Maerki:
> > I've taken a glance at all the legal information
that is around. Here
> > are my findings:
> > 
> > - NOTICE should be updated to conform to http://w
ww.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html
> > The second paragraph should be ("at"
instead of "by"):
> > This product includes software developed at
> > The Apache Software Foundation (http://www.apache.org/).
> 
> Is the s/at/by/ the only change needed to conform? 
Were the other
> paragraphs I put in the file OK?

Yes, I believe so.

> > - The license for pdf-transcoder.jar is still 1.1,
but should be 2.0.
> 
> Right, ok.
> 
> > - I think it would be good to note in the readme
for pdf-transcoder.jar
> > that it was derived from the FOP 0.90alpha1
release. This is otherwise
> > not apparent, only when you go checking the SVN
log:
> > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc
/xmlgraphics/batik/trunk/lib/pdf-transcoder.jar?view=log

> 
> Ok.
> 
> > - The license info should always indicate the
right license version.
> > "Apache License" is not enough. Please
check all the readme files in lib.
> 
> Checked.
> 
> > - xml-stylebook and crimson are ALv1.1, not 2.0
(as implied by pointing
> > to LICENSE in the root directory). Better just
list the ALv1.1.
> > 
> > - The README for xml-stylebook should point to htt
p://svn.apache.org/viewvc/xml/stylebook/trunk/
> 
> Ok.  I’ve removed xml-stylebook since it’s not
needed any more.

Even better then.

> > Cameron, would it make sense to create a branch
for Batik with the goal
> > of finishing the integration of XML Graphics
Commons (irrespective of
> > the Batik release)? That way I don't have to redo
the adjustments you
> > had to make and therefore I can more easily help
you figure out what
> > going wrong. Finally, are the problems apparent in
any case or are there
> > only special cases where the problem shows? Which
are those? Thanks!
> 
> Yeah that’s a good idea, better than leaving it
sitting around on my
> hard drive.  I’ve committed my current changes to
> …/batik/branches/commons-integration.
> 
> If you open samples/mathMetal.svg with Batik trunk and
with that branch,
> you will see the colour difference.  I think it’s
something to do with
> filters, but I haven’t really investigated yet.

Thanks. I'll take a look ASAP.


Jeremias Maerki


------------------------------------------------------------
---------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: batik-dev-unsubscribexmlgraphics.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: batik-dev-helpxmlgraphics.apache.org