Hi,

either way (excluding preflight or including it with warning) nothing prevents us from releasing a 1.8 release in a not so long time frame with the main addition a ready and usable preflight (and maybe first test version of new parser).

Timo


Am 23.05.2012 01:22, schrieb Ian Holsman:
you could always put a big warning in the README, and mark xmpbox/preflight as 
deprecated.
that should be sufficient for people not to use it while you work on doing the 
modification for 1.8.
On May 23, 2012, at 7:11 AM, Guillaume Bailleul wrote:

Hi,

I agree with Andreas on that point : we should not release a code that
will be dead soon.

preflight (and xmpbox) has never been released. So, in my opinion,
PDFBox 1.7 can be released without preflight... it bothers me for a
project but I think it is the best thing to do.

There is more than one issue linked with that:
* Eric's new version will change the interface
* xmpbox and jempbox should be merged (or at least one should desappear).


The schedule with these modification is not compatible with 1.7 release.


Guillaume


On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 9:19 PM, Leleu Eric<eric.leleu....@gmail.com>  wrote:
Hi,

2012/5/22 Andreas Lehmkuehler<andr...@lehmi.de>

Hi,

Am 21.05.2012 20:38, schrieb Leleu Eric:

  Hi,

I discussed with Guillaume about the Preflight refactoring and we have
some
questions about le preflight module and the next release.

Hmmm, last minute timing .... I planned to cut the release now.


I'm sorry :(



  The "new" preflight implementation will be more flexible and configurable.
But it  will  have significant impact on the current implementation. (New
interface, new way to load/validate the pdf...)

Due to the 1.7 release that is coming soon, we would like to know how we
should commit the preflight modifications without "breaking" the 1.7
release.

Here is 3 possibilities :

1 - Exclude the preflight module from the release and work with the
current
code without compatibility with the old version.

Any suggestions how to do that easily?


I was thinking to comment the preflight declaration in the pdfbox-reactor
pom file.
Doing this, the source code will be present in the tagged version, but they
will not have preflight jar in the repository with the version 1.7.

It's may not be the best way to achieve that but it is probably the easiest
way...


  2 - Include the preflight module in the 1.7 release, the new
implementation
will be create in new packages. They will have no more modifications of
the
old implementation that will be marked as deprecated. Expect bug fix
nothing will be done on old version, only new implementation will be
improved (new configuration capabilities, new validation format...). Old
version will be definitely removed in a further release (1.8 or 2.0 ?)

3 - Include the preflight module unchanged and release it. The new
validation tool will be done in a new module (Present only in the 2.0
branch ?). They will have no more modifications of the old module that
will
be marked as deprecated. Expect bug fix nothing will be done on old
version. Only new module will evolve (new configuration capabilities, new
validation format...).

I don't like the idea of releasing code for the first time which is
already meant to be dead.



  What is your opinion about that ?

IMHO, as there wasn't any Apache release of preflight the cleanest way
would be to replace the "old" implementation using the "new" one. But there
are some questions:

- Is the "new" implementation completed? If not, when do you expect to be
ready?



No, it isn't. Hopefully I will finish the refactoring at the end of June
(but without guaranty), so it will be quite late for the 1.7 release. :(


- Is the "new" implementation a full replacement of the old one ?



No, I thought that around 50% of the code will be reused.



Depending on your answers and other opinions we might postpone the release
for a couple of weeks.


  If you have any questions, do not hesitate.

Don't hesitate to answer fast ;-)


One more time, I'm really sorry to delay the pdfbox release.


  BR,

Eric


BR
Andreas Lehmkühler


BR,
Eric



--

 Timo Boehme
 OntoChem GmbH
 H.-Damerow-Str. 4
 06120 Halle/Saale
 T: +49 345 4780474
 F: +49 345 4780471
 timo.boe...@ontochem.com

_____________________________________________________________________

 OntoChem GmbH
 Geschäftsführer: Dr. Lutz Weber
 Sitz: Halle / Saale
 Registergericht: Stendal
 Registernummer: HRB 215461
_____________________________________________________________________

Reply via email to