Here's one way out of the argument: http://retroweaver.sourceforge.net/ Worth a try.
On 12.02.2012 21:58:04 Ilija Pavlic wrote: > There are pros and cons to keeping backward compatibility and bickering > on mailing lists will not make one position a clear winner. Please > don't make this a personal issue if only for the sake of other mailing list > users. > > BR, > Ilija. > > 12. 2. 2012., u 20:42, "Mica Cooper" <[email protected]> napisao: > > > Well Ken, > > > > I can tell you we have Java code in production from 1999. Unfortunately, > > many projects have fallen to the C++(itus) which currently makes Java so > > complicated that new programmers are learning .NET first now and makes it > > difficult to move very large codebases forward. > > > > I greatly appreciate the efforts of Andreas and other volunteers, and I have > > contributed code to other projects myself. You are obviously quick to judge > > and ASSume motivation to others. > > > > Java 1.4 is not ancient...COBOL is ancient but programs written in the > > 1960's are still running today. Developers of only a few year's experience > > often fail to look at the longer picture. > > > > MC > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Ken Bowen [mailto:[email protected]] > > Sent: Sunday, February 12, 2012 1:28 PM > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: Re: Compatible PDFBox Version with java version "1.4.2_10" > > > > MC, > > > > As a developer, I for one am quite grateful to the /VOLUNTEER/ staff which > > develops PDFBox and other open-source products. Perhaps you can tell us all > > whether you have contributed $$ or development time to help the project. > > You can't be much of a developer if you believe it is easy to maintain > > backward compatibility with ancient programing languages or operating > > systems. > > > > --Ken Bowen > > > > On Feb 12, 2012, at 10:38 AM, Mica Cooper wrote: > > > >> Srinivas, > >> > >> We are using the older PDFBox 0.7.3 1.4 JDK version from Sourceforge > >> and have no issues for a number of years. Yes, it does not include a > >> number of newer features, fixes, etc but it is stable for basic use. > >> > >> Unfortunately, PDFBox has fallen into the Microsoft-dev thinking trap > >> of not being backward compatible like so many Java libraries. > >> > >> MC > >> > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Andreas Lehmkuehler [mailto:[email protected]] > >> Sent: Sunday, February 12, 2012 9:29 AM > >> To: [email protected] > >> Subject: Re: Compatible PDFBox Version with java version "1.4.2_10" > >> > >> Hi, > >> > >> Am 10.02.2012 11:49, schrieb Seema, Srinivas: > >>> Hi, > >>> > >>> I want to use PDFBox ,to convert PDF pages as images. > >>> Please Suggest the Compatible PDFBox Version for java 1.4.2_10 along > >>> with download link of that version. > >> Starting with version 1.0.0 PDFBox relies on Java5. There is a very > >> old incubation release which is compatible with Java 1.4, but I can't > >> recommend to use that one. You really should update your java runtime. > >> > >>> Thanks& Regards, > >>> Srinivas > >>> > >>> > >>> Confidential: This electronic message and all contents contain > >>> information > >> from Syntel, Inc. which may be privileged, confidential or otherwise > >> protected from disclosure. The information is intended to be for the > >> addressee only. If you are not the addressee, any disclosure, copy, > >> distribution or use of the contents of this message is prohibited. If > >> you have received this electronic message in error, please notify the > >> sender immediately and destroy the original message and all copies. > >>> > >> > >> BR > >> Andreas Lehmkühler > >> > >> > > > > Jeremias Maerki
