pdf toolchain notes & suggestions

[Dave Pawson]

On Mon, 2004-09-27 at 21:09, Karsten Wade wrote:

> > > Strictly speaking, we shouldn't need to recompile it under gcj, but 
> > > it's a nice, safe thing to do if we're going to use gij as the java 
> > > interpreter.
> > 
> > Is that pure NIH, or are there other reasons?
> >   Why make life hard?
> 
> FOP needs to compile with a free Java compiler and run in a free Java
> environment to be part of a completely free toolchain. 

That's a view. I don't support it.
Sun provide Java. Lets use it.


> 
> One reason for using gcj for compiling is that if we need to report bugs
> with other free software, our components are going to be suspect if they
> have been tainted by non-free components during compiling or runtime. 
Your definition. Not mine.
What's your definition of a bug in this context?
Any reason we shouldn't support fop by feeding back to them?
Or would you prefer to fix them on the version used here?
I can't see the rationale there.

> There are developers who will push bug reports back at us in those
> situations, and I support them in doing so. 
> 
> As hard as it may be to start, having a completely free toolchain will
> be blessing.

To whom?
Sounds like whipping yourself to me.


-- 
Regards DaveP.
XSLT&Docbook  FAQ
http://www.dpawson.co.uk/xsl