Hello Amedee, Amedee Van Gasse <amedee.vanga...@itextpdf.com> schrieb am Di., 26. Juli 2016 um 18:00 Uhr:
> Hello Benedikt, > > Op 21-07-16 om 08:39 schreef Benedikt Ritter: > > Hallo Amedee, > > *snip* > > >> However, if the answer really is no, we will explore the other options. > >> > > > > I'm not really happy with what your saying here. You're basically saying: > > please invest your (spare time) to maintain Java 5 code, > > I'm afraid you misinterpreted my email. > > I asked a question, and I said beforehand that I would accept "no" as an > answer. > > > now you're "threaten" us that you'll fork the project. > > I'm afraid there is again a misinterpretation. Hey, I *know* how > sensitive the "fork" topic is in Open Source. Really. We've had our own > share of forks too, and they weren't as nice (because they intentionally > tried to circumvent an AGPL license). > > I gave 4 options that we are choosing from, and only those 4 options. I > will repeat them again: > > 1. Tell our affected customers to move to Java 7 > 2. Switch the dependency from commons-imaging to sanselan, and loose > some features > 3. Remove the functionality that depends on commons-imaging alltogether > 4. Depend on a 'release' of commons-imaging that is on Java 5. > > Below that, I mentioned something that was not numbered, forking. It > came up in an internal brainstorm in a meeting, and I personally gave > lots of arguments why we should really really REALLY avoid to fork. I > repeat: forking was briefly considered, and rejected. > > > I'm open for discussion how we can get to a 1.0 release that is 5.0 > > compatible *together* or how we can backport some of the fixes and > features > > to sanselan and release it as 0.98. > > Emmanuel Bourg and Gary Gregory already answered the question. I read > between the lines of Gary Gregory's email that a contribution would be > welcomed. I would like to thank Emmanuel and Gary for their replies. > When there is a 1.0 release, and if at that time our Java 5 product > isn't EOL yet, then a contribution will most definitely be considered, > obviously. After all, we're an Open Source company ourselves, and we > know very well how Open Source works. > Thank you for this clarification. Sorry, if I came along harshly. We're looking forward to collaborating with you. Regards, Benedikt > > > -- > Amedee Van Gasse > QA Engineer | iText Software BVBA > amedee.vanga...@itextpdf.com > http://itextpdf.com > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > >
