[fedora-java] FOP, gcj, classpath, oh my!

[Tommy Reynolds]

Uttered Karsten Wade <kwade at redhat.com>, spake thus:

> Tommy - is the barrier to having make run the Java tools the lack of
> support in xmlto?  If we're this close, maybe we can get xmlto updated
> in the devel tree (rawhide) right away.  Bonus would be if we could see
> all of this pushed eventually into updates to FCs 5 and 6.

Karsten,

I've had XMLTO working with FOP, and producing PDF's, for quite a
while now.  As Paul W Frields as pointed out, the PDF's look awful
because we need work on the stylesheet.

As you probably remember, I sent the appropriate XMLTO patches for
FOP to Tim Waugh many, many moons ago.  AIUI, his reluctance to add
them officially has been mostly that FOP wasn't free.  The FOP
dependancy in the XMLTO RPM would be endlessly confusing.

If needed I could mangle the patches to use either FOP or passivetex
so as not to break things while our FOP implementation matures, with
the default renderer being passivetex.  These are just minor details.

I lack the java-fu to compile FOP using gcj; if someone could do
it for me, and maybe send me the patches, I could provide Tim a 
with a complete package.

In summary:

1) If we could get someone to provide patches to compile FOP using
gcj, I could do the RPM-fu.

2) Having hopes of a FOP rpm, I can update the XMLTO rpm to utilize it.

3) Present Tim Waugh with a fait acompli.

I'm not sure that #3 is sufficient to get the updates into rawhide,
but it's a necessary step.

Cheers

-- 
I'm already an anomaly, I shall soon be an anachronism, and I have
every intention of dying an abuse!
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-docs-list/attachments/20060915/f5c500f3/attachment.sig>