+1 on #1. On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 8:08 AM, Maruan Sahyoun <[email protected]>wrote:
> I think that going for option 1 is the best approach. > > The new NonSequentialParser PDFBOX-1199 is a huge step forwards reusing > the 'old' codebase and overcoming the main issues resolving from the fact > that the old parser was sequential and not in line with how PDFs are build. > > Working on the ConformingParser I've outlined my approach in PDFBOX-1000. > As I don't want to simply take existing code without revisiting it and > making sure that conformance is met I agree with Timo's point that this > might affect a couple of internal classes. So this is a longer term goal. > With regards to the ConformingParser it would be good to get some more > feedback about the current approach as moving forward with ConformingParser > -> SimpleParser -> PDFLexer it will create a lot of effort if we revisit > that design decision. > > So from that doing a 1.7.x release using the current trunk will provide a > lot of benefits and leave time for redoing a new parser 'from scratch'. > > BR > Maruan > > Am 09.04.2012 um 13:30 schrieb Timo Boehme: > > > Hi, > > > > I do also prefer option 1. For the conforming parser to be cleanly > integrated I assume we will have to adjust a couple of internal classes > thus we really should have one (or more) releases before this major release > with the 'old' code base. > > > > With the new intermediate 'conforming' parser (PDFBOX-1199) I think we > should do a 1.7.x release. While creating a branch to separate next major > release would be a cleaner solution I'm afraid that maintaining two > branches is currently not doable with the available resources. > > > > > > Best regards, > > Timo > > > > > > Am 08.04.2012 21:26, schrieb Andreas Lehmkuehler: > >> when preparing the next board report I was wondering what to write about > >> our plans for the next release. > >> > >> I guess it's obvious that sooner or later we will go for a 2.x release. > >> The major release may include the following > >> > >> - merge/replace Jempbox/Xmpbox > >> - remove deprecated stuff > >> - move to java6 as minimum requirement > >> - switch to the (completed?) conforming parser as default > >> - .... > >> > >> IMO we have different options how to do that: > >> > >> 1. > >> > >> Release a 1.7.x version based on the current trunk. Start with the major > >> release using the current trunk. > >> > >> pros: > >> > >> - new feature release after 9 months > >> - 1.7.x release without much effort > >> - enough time for the major release > >> - ... > >> > >> cons: > >> > >> - 2 XMP libs > >> - unstable conforming parser > >> - ... > >> > >> 2. > >> > >> Choose a couple of improvements/fixes from the trunk and apply them to > >> the 1.6 branch and release a 1.6.x bugfix or a 1.7.0 feature release. > >> Start with the major release using the current trunk. > >> > >> pros: > >> > >> - new feature/bugfix release only with chosen features/fixes > >> - enough time for the major release > >> - no unstable conforming parser, as it wouldn't be part of the release > >> - ... > >> > >> cons: > >> > >> - 2 XMP libs (if we would do a 1.7.0 release including preflight) > >> - a lot of discussion on what will be part of the release and what > won't be > >> - a lot of work to create the release compaired to alternative 1 > >> - ... > >> > >> 3. > >> > >> Drop all 1.6.x/1.7.0 plans and start with the major release using the > >> current trunk. > >> > >> pros: > >> > >> - we wouldn't have to spend time on a 1.6.x/1.7.0 release > >> - ... > >> > >> cons: > >> > >> - too much time without release > >> - too less time to work on the new major release, because of con 1 > >> - ... > >> > >> I prefer option 1, what do you think? > >> > >> BR > >> Andreas Lehmkühler > > > > > > -- > > > > Timo Boehme > > OntoChem GmbH > > H.-Damerow-Str. 4 > > 06120 Halle/Saale > > T: +49 345 4780474 > > F: +49 345 4780471 > > [email protected] > > > > _____________________________________________________________________ > > > > OntoChem GmbH > > Geschäftsführer: Dr. Lutz Weber > > Sitz: Halle / Saale > > Registergericht: Stendal > > Registernummer: HRB 215461 > > _____________________________________________________________________ > > > >
