+1
-Original Message-
From: bugzi...@apache.org [mailto:bugzi...@apache.org]
Sent: Friday, February 17, 2017 12:43 PM
To: dev@poi.apache.org
Subject: [Bug 60741] NPOIFS move from read-only flag to 3-state enum
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60741
--- Comment #2 from Greg
Chart processing should be created in a package separate from the spreadsheet
packages so that the word processing and presentation packages can use them as
well. In the XML world, these are defined in a separate portion of the spec,
and just have hooks from Word, Excel, and Powerpoint. The exis
Are we trying to support OOXML schemas other than the 1st edition?
-Original Message-
From: Javen O'Neal [mailto:javenon...@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, March 06, 2017 12:24 PM
To: POI Developers List
Subject: Re: xlsb Streaming Reader?
+1!
We currently have no support for xlsb, either str
All Object getCellValue() does is change the location of the switch though
right? User code still has to do it, either before the get, or after, and doing
this with the setter vs. using overridden methods as we do right now seems to
be a little anti-OO to me. I'm not real sure what annoying code
Give an example of the code and the XML it produces. This is the XML Word 2016
produces:
This is a test
The line does not add a bunch of spaces to get the last word on the last line
over to the right margin.
-Original Message-
From: Stefano Errani [
I'm using Eclipse, and really appreciate how easy it is to set up a new project.
-Original Message-
From: Dominik Stadler [mailto:dominik.stad...@gmx.at]
Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2017 3:27 PM
To: POI Developers List
Subject: Re: Developing POI with an IDE
Previously Eclipse, nowadays Int
I think that would be a good idea.
-Original Message-
From: Allison, Timothy B. [mailto:talli...@mitre.org]
Sent: Friday, September 15, 2017 7:07 AM
To: POI Developers List
Subject: RE: Apache POI 4.0/Java 8
Thank you, Dominik!!!
So, speaking of 4.0...should we move to semantic version
Here is a somewhat radical idea, and maybe too hard to implement, but maybe we
should package this a bit differently like poi-core, poi-ss, poi-wp, poi-misc.
And then apply semantic versioning to each package separately so poi-core and
poi-ss would be at 4.0.0 and poi-wp and poi-misc might still
al Message-----
From: Murphy, Mark [mailto:murphym...@metalexmfg.com]
Sent: Friday, September 15, 2017 8:12 AM
To: 'POI Developers List'
Subject: RE: Apache POI 4.0/Java 8
Here is a somewhat radical idea, and maybe too hard to implement, but maybe we
should package this a bit differently l
This actually seems to be an optimal solution as we wouldn't need to worry
about refactoring in a new XML binding scheme, and as Java and technology moves
forward, other users of XMLBeans are likely to be affected by the same bugs
that we are having issues with.
-Original Message-
From:
My other thought was to add a method with a signature like getText(boolean
includeDeleted). Calling without the boolean would simply make the call to the
new method passing false. That would change behavior for existing code to omit
deleted text, but in my mind, the typical use case would only w
leted) is on the right track, I think. Given that a run can
have ruby text and/or be a formula and/or be any one of the many things on
4139-4140, should we be more specific? getDeletedText(), getRuby(), etc...
-Original Message-
From: Murphy, Mark [mailto:murphym...@metalexmfg.com]
Sent: M
Let me say first that I am generally not in favor of a rip and replace
strategy. It tends to be change for the sake of change, and if we can avoid it,
that would be better. I know that we have issues with XMLBeans, but since we
have been offered the opportunity to patch XMLBeans, maybe that woul
If we are going to take on maintenance of XMLBeans, I would suggest that
getting it out of the attic would be the most appropriate course of action.
This would reduce confusion for people trying to find XML Beans as there would
only be a single project to reference rather than one in the attic a
I think with semantic versioning, we can't do anything that breaks
compatibility except on major version changes, so no removals until 5.0. We can
add features on minor version changes, and point changes are just for bug
fixes. I think it would be good to schedule minor and major versions, and a
Could the functionality be written to use H2 if it exists in the classpath, but
stick with the current process if it does not?
-Original Message-
From: Dominik Stadler [mailto:dominik.stad...@gmx.at]
Sent: Friday, January 26, 2018 5:10 AM
To: POI Developers List
Subject: Re: adding depe
I know we said that 4.0.0 will start using semantic versioning, but we never
really discussed release schedules. It was mentioned, but no one ever said yea
or nay. Are we all still trying to digest what semantic versioning means to
POI? This still has a feeling of flying by the seat of our pants
I think that if we are going to update XMLBeans, we should get it out of the
attic rather than create our own version.
-Original Message-
From: pj.fanning [mailto:fannin...@yahoo.com]
Sent: Monday, February 19, 2018 12:02 PM
To: dev@poi.apache.org
Subject: publishing poi xmlbeans jars
I
I believe that we have already been offered that option, we just need a
sufficient number of folks (I think the number was 3) to form a PMC and make a
formal request. I don't think it is politically complicated. I don't even think
we need a huge amount of effort as XMLBeans is largely complete a
PJ, I am guessing you would be
willing as you have made the fork. Just need two more.
Are there any real objections to POI taking on XMLBeans as a second product?
-Original Message-
From: Murphy, Mark [mailto:murphym...@metalexmfg.com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2018 10:44 AM
To:
be able to restart the
discussion, and maybe start the process with the Attic PMC.
-Original Message-----
From: Murphy, Mark [mailto:murphym...@metalexmfg.com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2018 11:14 AM
To: 'POI Developers List'
Subject: RE: publishing poi xmlbeans jars
Here is
+1
-Original Message-
From: Alain FAGOT BÉAREZ [mailto:abea...@for-scala.it]
Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2018 2:31 PM
To: POI Developers List
Cc: marco.ger...@nau.edu
Subject: Re: Fwd: Challenge on automatic generation of documentation
+1
Originale Nachricht
Von: Do
Yet another reason to consider package reorganization.
-Original Message-
From: Nick Burch [mailto:n...@apache.org]
Sent: Friday, March 02, 2018 6:15 AM
To: dev@poi.apache.org
Subject: Single Java 9 module jar?
Hi All
>From my understanding of Java 9 modules, you basically can't have on
If we do that, it needs to be in a major release because namespaces change. If
we are going to repackage to support Java 9 modules, that should also happen at
the same time.
-Original Message-
From: pj.fanning [mailto:fannin...@yahoo.com]
Sent: Tuesday, March 06, 2018 4:35 PM
To: dev@po
Since JAXB is being dropped from Java SE (deprecated in Java 9, removed in Java
11), I don't think that this will be a problem. There may be other marshallers
out there, but the more immediate problem is that we need to remove all JAXB
code from POI because we can no longer rely on the JVM imple
A. +1
B. 1.6
C. +1
-Original Message-
From: pj.fanning [mailto:fannin...@yahoo.com]
Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2018 4:51 AM
To: dev@poi.apache.org
Subject: XMLBeans 3.0.0 votes
Can I get votes on the following?
A. Stop supporting Java 1.4
B. If we stop supporting Java 1.4, do set Java 1.6
It was my understanding that we now own XMLBeans, and no board discussion is
necessary to release under http://www.apache.org/dist/xmlbeans/release
I think it was just some of the attic PMC that was bringing up the issue, not
the board. In fact, I believe the board's response was JFDI.
So we ow
I'm thinking that you should be able to reorder things using an XMLBeans
cursor, and maybe a quicksort.
-Original Message-
From: pj.fanning [mailto:fannin...@yahoo.com]
Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2018 3:40 PM
To: dev@poi.apache.org
Subject: reordering xssf rows
I've been looking at
https:/
This is fine for reading documents which conform to the newer standards, but we
should always make sure that on write we conform to the least common standard
so that older versions of Office can read them. That is if we write in 2010
format, 2003 application will ignore bits that they don't reco
,
Alain
Gesendet mit BlueMail
Originale Nachricht
Von: "Murphy, Mark"
Gesendet: Fri Aug 17 09:13:33 GMT-03:00 2018
An: 'POI Developers List'
Betreff: RE: Upgrade OOXML schema to 3rd edition?
This is fine for reading documents which conform to the new
I have a patch out there (58633) that I created so that I could make a border
drawing utility that would not be a performance hog. Now I am closing in on the
border utility being complete, but 58633 is not yet checked in. I expect that I
should make the new patch dependent on 58633, but when I c
Can we get bug 58787 into the Beta?
-Original Message-
From: Nick Burch [mailto:n...@apache.org]
Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2016 5:50 PM
To: POI Developers List
Subject: RE: Beta time yet?
On Wed, 30 Mar 2016, Allison, Timothy B. wrote:
> I added a new report "mime_diffs_A_to_B_details.x
er patch, so takes a little more
time to review. I'll try my best to squeeze it in, but no promises.
On Mar 31, 2016 04:01, "Murphy, Mark" wrote:
> Can we get bug 58787 into the Beta?
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Nick Burch [mailto:n...@apache.org]
> S
This seems a little counterintuitive to me. I would expect that once a Workbook
is closed, it cannot be used. Closing should be the last thing you do with a
Workbook. I would be more inclined to fix the documentation than to allow
differing behavior between Workbooks read from the file system, a
I want to apologize in advance on this Stream of Consciousness post. I hope it
makes sense to someone.
At work I have been using the SS side of POI, and have become fairly
comfortable with it. I realize that there are some things still that need to be
done, and some issues with XML Beans that h
Is there a main developer for XWPF?
-Original Message-
From: Nick Burch [mailto:apa...@gagravarr.org]
Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2016 9:35 AM
To: POI Developers List
Subject: Re: Musings on POI Architecture
On Wed, 1 Jun 2016, Murphy, Mark wrote:
> At work I have been using the SS s
nd start experimenting! :)
Forking the Git mirror might be the easiest way to manage these contributions.
On Jun 1, 2016 06:35, "Nick Burch" wrote:
> On Wed, 1 Jun 2016, Murphy, Mark wrote:
>
>> At work I have been using the SS side of POI, and have become fairly
>> comfortab
If I open a document template:
XWPFDocument document = new
XWPFDocument(POIXMLDocument.openPackage("Normal.dotm"));
Add some text:
XWPFParagraph paragraph = document.createParagraph();
XWPFRun run = paragraph.createRun();
run.setText("At tutorialspoint.com, we strive hard to "
+
Does that not cause a memory leak in Closeable objects?
-Original Message-
From: Nick Burch [mailto:apa...@gagravarr.org]
Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2016 6:04 PM
To: POI Developers List
Subject: Re: Strange behavior in XWPF
On Wed, 1 Jun 2016, Murphy, Mark wrote:
> Then write t
2 Jun 2016, Murphy, Mark wrote:
> Does that not cause a memory leak in Closeable objects?
We need to fix the underlying bug really! For now, you can open the package
Read Only to avoid it, or wait for GC to clear out the closable object a bit
Doesn't matter though since XWPF also doesn't handle templates properly.
-Original Message-----
From: Murphy, Mark [mailto:murphym...@metalexmfg.com]
Sent: Thursday, June 02, 2016 3:16 PM
To: 'POI Developers List'
Subject: RE: Strange behavior in XWPF
Read Only does
I have a small change to xwpf that I am working on in a local Git repository,
but I need to know how to create a patch. The documentation on the How to
contribute page isn't particularly helpful.
Much of the Chart code and other things are common parts between Spreadsheets,
Documents, and Presentations. At least for the XML side of things. I propose
that the DrawingML portions of these three projects be consolidated into a
separate package or group of packages to deal with things like ch
ced in the package. This
could be handled in the createChart, createDiagram, or createTheme methods the
specific package.
-Original Message-
From: Nick Burch [mailto:apa...@gagravarr.org]
Sent: Friday, July 08, 2016 8:09 AM
To: POI Developers List
Subject: Re: DrawingML
On Fri, 8 Jul 20
Maybe we should consider switching to semantic versioning. Particularly since
we are starting to use Maven more, It might help those who use Maven to manage
their dependencies. http://semver.org/
-Original Message-
From: Javen O'Neal [mailto:javenon...@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, August 22
I've got this one. It is a license text issue. I can fix it when I get home
from work.
-Original Message-
From: Apache Jenkins Server [mailto:jenk...@builds.apache.org]
Sent: Thursday, October 13, 2016 9:09 AM
To: dev@poi.apache.org
Subject: Build failed in Jenkins: POI-OpenJDK #235
See
Take a look at this commit, it shows what I am talking about. There is still a
lot more to do, but I don't want to go too far down a path that will be
incorrect. The classes XMLContent and XMLMarkup are delegates that provide
common functionality to XWPFDocument, and XWPFHeaderFooter, XWPFTableC
I have an even better solution now. It involves using the XmlBeans cursor to
insert bits into the structure. I have a working prototype that I will post to
GitHub tonight when I get home. This is very promising, particularly as it
seems to be the way that issue #56854 alludes to as being the bes
This should have gone to dev, but I was replying to a user thread, so I have
moved it over to the dev list.
-Original Message-
From: Murphy, Mark [mailto:murphym...@metalexmfg.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2016 7:29 AM
To: 'POI Users List'
Subject: RE: POI-3.15: Commons-C
ue, Oct 25, 2016 at 7:34 AM, Murphy, Mark
>
> wrote:
>
> > I have an even better solution now. It involves using the XmlBeans
> > cursor to insert bits into the structure. I have a working prototype
> > that I will post to GitHub tonight when I get home. This is very
>
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/40723370/was-opensagres-allowed-to-use-apache-poi-like-packages
Does ASF defend its package names, or do we just ignore these kinds of things
and folks use them at their own peril?
Without looking, can we use that code to read and modify it to allow writing a
2006ML document as a single XML document? I have no opinion on the read only
parser.
-Original Message-
From: Allison, Timothy B. [mailto:talli...@mitre.org]
Sent: Wednesday, November 23, 2016 2:38 PM
To: POI
Lol, just from looking through the code, and standard, there are a number of
things that I know are not handled or not handled properly in XWPF. A quick
subset from the top of my head includes:
* Pictures that are not inlined in the main document, header, or footer parts.
* Sections
* SDT content
Interesting, Jenkins build 35 failed presumably due to something I did, though
I don't really understand where the failure occurred, then build 36 succeeded
with no rollback or correction to the class I changed.
-Original Message-
From: Apache Jenkins Server [mailto:jenk...@builds.apache
This is a great point Greg. Though drawings are part of the DrawingML spec, all
documents currently handle it separately as we don't have a DrawingML package.
We would probably benefit from having separate packages for shared components
of the spec like DrawingML, and Charts.
-Original Mess
I believe that one of the reasons people get stuck on really old versions of
POI is that inevitably there are breaking changes in nearly every release. So
folks pick a version, and it remains the one they use. If we were to shift to a
semantic versioning scheme where we only introduced breaking
I thought that there was a way to save a workbook in place when using a File
type input. But I can't find the secret sauce. If I open a Workbook using
WorkbookFactory(new File(filename)); I cannot write to an output stream based
on the same file name. If I write the modified workbook to an outpu
I guess I don't understand this that well, so please bear with me. With a File
loaded read-write how are changes stored such that writing to a different
OutputStream is not feasible? I don't think they are written back to the
original File until a write operation is performed. Or is that incorre
58 matches
Mail list logo
