Glen Mazza wrote: > I think Victor said he didn't want to collaborate anymore: > > http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=fop-dev&m=111263144615399&w=2 > http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=fop-dev&m=111265443425492&w=2
Even those on this list who are not native English speakers will be able to easily understand the difference between "my efforts at collaboration between our two projects have utterly failed at every level" and "I don't want to collaborate anymore". > Again, I will stay out of it if another worked with his code. > I don't have time for the font work, but certainly recognize > it needs improvement. I'm in layout now--if I don't like the > front end it doesn't matter (as much!) anymore, I am now past it. > > But we've had Victor's front-end architecture for the first > of my two years here and my mathematical reduction of it for > the second. This actually confirms what I have suspected all along. You never ever EVER saw my front-end architecture. It never made it into FOP. If I had a list of 1000 changes that needed to be made, you took a snapshot after #9 had just been completed and decided that because that did not meet your standards, it should be killed. It didn't meet anyone's standards, certainly not mine. > Improvements on layout have been much more rapid in the second year. This is pure speculation with no shred of reasonable nexus. I have a favorite "alternate history" theory as well that has FOP modularization work done in March, 2004, FOP 0.21 released in April, 2004. At this point ALL modules can be improved without giving up benefits of working code, and developers start doing so. Font refactoring is completed by July, 2004. That and other improvements were released in August, 2004, and Victor was then free to work on the new layout system. Mine is just as much speculation as yours (although I can point to how it worked in FOray). Victor Mote
