Re: PDF generation problem solved for me

[David Malcolm <dmalcolm redhat com>]

On Thu, 2005-04-07 at 11:41 -0500, Tommy Reynolds wrote:
> Uttered "Paul W. Frields" <stickster gmail com>, spake thus:
> 
> > There was some list traffic about this several times in the not-too-
> > distant past... I can't remember the content of all the discussions, but
> > the idea of whether to use FOP was definitely tossed around.  Could
> > anyone with some time and inclination check the archives and try to
> > summarize the discussions here?  Or is that unnecessary?  If someone
> > were to do that, I would put a page up on the wiki in an agreeable place
> > (and with an agreeable name) just so we have a reference point.
> 
> The concern was that FOP needed some non-GPL assistance to render
> some graphic content. Specifically, FOP can render BMP, EPS, GIF,
> JPEG and TIFF files without any assistance.  With JIMI or JAI (which
> are not GPL'ed), PNG can be rendered.  With BATIK, also an Apache
> product, SVG files can also be rendered.
> 
> None of the non-free assistant packages are included or distributed
> with FOP.  FOP will notice these add-ons if present, but will work
> without them, with the only caveat being PNG input will not work.
> 
> The official details are at http://xml.apache.org/fop/graphics.html,
> for those who are interested.

CC-ing to fedora-devel-java-list

Surely there must be a GPL-friendly PNG handler in Java somewhere?  How
hard would it be to rewrite this part of FOP?  What's the status of
getting a natively-compiled FOP into Fedora?