DO NOT REPLY [Bug 52763] When a marker contains list-block FOP crashes with NPE

[bugzilla]

https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52763

Glenn Adams  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |RESOLVED
 Resolution||FIXED

--- Comment #7 from Glenn Adams  2012-04-11 21:31:24 UTC ---
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1325016&view=rev

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the assignee for the bug.

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 52763] When a marker contains list-block FOP crashes with NPE

[bugzilla]

https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52763

--- Comment #6 from Glenn Adams  2012-04-11 19:01:44 UTC ---
Created attachment 28587
  --> https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=28587
minimal FO test file

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the assignee for the bug.

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 52763] When a marker contains list-block FOP crashes with NPE

[bugzilla]

https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52763

Glenn Adams  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Attachment #28583|0   |1
is obsolete||

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the assignee for the bug.

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 53065] event message lookup field part fails to perform lookup

[bugzilla]

https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53065

Glenn Adams  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |RESOLVED
 Resolution||FIXED

--- Comment #1 from Glenn Adams  2012-04-11 18:44:54 UTC ---
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1324913&view=rev

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the assignee for the bug.

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 53065] event message lookup field part fails to perform lookup

[bugzilla]

https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53065

Glenn Adams  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Priority|P2  |P3

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the assignee for the bug.

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 53065] New: event message lookup field part fails to perform lookup

[bugzilla]

https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53065

 Bug #: 53065
   Summary: event message lookup field part fails to perform
lookup
   Product: Fop
   Version: 1.1dev
  Platform: All
OS/Version: All
Status: NEW
  Severity: normal
  Priority: P2
 Component: general
AssignedTo: fop-dev@xmlgraphics.apache.org
ReportedBy: gad...@apache.org
Classification: Unclassified


in revision 932481, the functionality to perform a lookup on a LookupFieldPart
was removed [1] due to lack of a default bundle

[1]
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/xmlgraphics/fop/trunk/src/java/org/apache/fop/events/EventFormatter.java?r1=932481&r2=932480&pathrev=932481

this change resulted in certain event messages no longer containing the
intended information;

for example, the following message appeared

org.apache.fop.fo.ValidationException: "fo:retrieve-marker" is not a valid
child of "fo:block"! (See position 23:62)

instead of the desired message:

org.apache.fop.fo.ValidationException: "fo:retrieve-marker" is not a valid
child of "fo:block"! An fo:retrieve-marker is permitted only as the descendant
of an fo:static-content. (See position 23:62)

in particular, the "[ {ruleViolated,lookup}]" part of the message

"{offendingNode}" is not a valid child of
"{elementName}"![ {ruleViolated,lookup}]{{locator}}

is being elided to the empty string

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the assignee for the bug.

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 50062] fop steals focus from GUI applications even though it is a CLI application

[bugzilla]

https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50062

Jeremy Huddleston  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
 Resolution|WONTFIX |

--- Comment #6 from Jeremy Huddleston  2012-04-11 
17:45:21 UTC ---
If that is true, then fop is misdesigned, and that IS a bug.  There's no reason
that you should need to access a physical head in order to do anything since
you don't actually USE the head.

Take a look at the patch that I provided you with back in 2010.  We've been
using it in Macports for almost 2 years now.  I suggest you take the fix.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the assignee for the bug.

Re: on changing fop documentation sources to markdown

[Glenn Adams]

On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 3:29 AM, Chris Bowditch
wrote:

> My preference would be to find a way that allows us to move to CMS whilst
> keeping the xdoc source format. If it's not possible to keep the xdoc then
> I'm happy to accept moving to markdown or whatever works best.
>

+1

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 52763] When a marker contains list-block FOP crashes with NPE

[bugzilla]

https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52763

Ilia Masliev  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEEDINFO|NEW

--- Comment #5 from Ilia Masliev  2012-04-11 13:15:40 UTC 
---
Information provided.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the assignee for the bug.

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 52763] When a marker contains list-block FOP crashes with NPE

[bugzilla]

https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52763

--- Comment #4 from Ilia Masliev  2012-04-11 13:13:59 UTC 
---
Created attachment 28584
  --> https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=28584
Output from the fop processor.

fop 1.0 was used to process the fo.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the assignee for the bug.

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 52763] When a marker contains list-block FOP crashes with NPE

[bugzilla]

https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52763

--- Comment #3 from Ilia Masliev  2012-04-11 13:12:41 UTC 
---
Created attachment 28583
  --> https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=28583
This is the test fo file on which the problem can be reproduced.

A modification of the hide.fo from samples.The only change is addition of list
block to the marker.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the assignee for the bug.

Re: on changing fop documentation sources to markdown

[Chris Bowditch]

On 09/04/2012 15:47, Glenn Adams wrote:

Hi Glenn, Clay,


On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 6:50 AM, Clay Leeds > wrote:


On Apr 8, 2012, at 7:21 PM, Glenn Adams mailto:gl...@skynav.com>> wrote:


Yes, we'd lose the XML-based nature of the documentation.
That's a fairly large loss, but I don't know if that's a
showstopper, considering the benefits of having CMS-based
documentation.


What prevents you from using the existing xdoc format as source,
then using an XSLT to map to MD whence it can be imported into /
processed by the CMS. Or can you incorporate this translation
process into the CMS?


Nothing prevents, but the goal is in this exercise is to minimize
launch preparation time. ;-)

If we continue to use xdoc, the CMS is skipped. It's certainly
possible, but...


Could you not use the "dynamic content" approach indicated by 
http://www.apache.org/dev/cms.html#dynamic-content? For example, use 
buildbot to run the forrest markdown plugin 
. Or 
use an External Build ?


My main issue is switching our source format for FOP docs from XML to 
MD. I'm not comfortable with making this change. However, if my 
position is a minority among FOP committers, I will defer to the majority.


I too am reluctant to lose the current xdoc format as the current docs 
are very easy to maintain.




Again, I don't particularly see a problem that needs to be solved with 
switching to CMS. True, publishing FOP site docs is presently a little 
clunky, but I was able to figure it out (from scratch) in a few hours, 
and can reproduce it at will. Of course, if people.apache.org 
 is really going away in 2012, then I agree 
something has to be done.


If you have cycles to spend on FOP documentation, I would prefer you 
spend it on updating the site and wiki docs, which are, in many cases, 
quite out of date. However, how you use your time is your call. :)


We have to move off the current documentation publishing method that we 
have. It is an Apache requirement to move to the CMS based approach by 
the end of 2012. So it is urgent that someone on the team works on the 
CMS migration right now. If Clay is unable to continue, then someone 
else must take over. Hopefully Clay still has some time for this?


My preference would be to find a way that allows us to move to CMS 
whilst keeping the xdoc source format. If it's not possible to keep the 
xdoc then I'm happy to accept moving to markdown or whatever works best.


Clay, can you comment on Glenn's suggested approach to keep xdoc and 
move to CMS? Will that be feasible?


Thanks,

Chris



Regards,
G.