On Thu, 2005-04-07 at 15:49 -0400, David Malcolm wrote: > On Thu, 2005-04-07 at 11:41 -0500, Tommy Reynolds wrote: > > Uttered "Paul W. Frields" <stickster@xxxxxxxxx>, spake thus: > > > > > There was some list traffic about this several times in the not-too- > > > distant past... I can't remember the content of all the discussions, but > > > the idea of whether to use FOP was definitely tossed around. Could > > > anyone with some time and inclination check the archives and try to > > > summarize the discussions here? Or is that unnecessary? If someone > > > were to do that, I would put a page up on the wiki in an agreeable place > > > (and with an agreeable name) just so we have a reference point. > > > > The concern was that FOP needed some non-GPL assistance to render > > some graphic content. Specifically, FOP can render BMP, EPS, GIF, > > JPEG and TIFF files without any assistance. With JIMI or JAI (which > > are not GPL'ed), PNG can be rendered. With BATIK, also an Apache > > product, SVG files can also be rendered. > > > > None of the non-free assistant packages are included or distributed > > with FOP. FOP will notice these add-ons if present, but will work > > without them, with the only caveat being PNG input will not work. > > > > The official details are at http://xml.apache.org/fop/graphics.html, > > for those who are interested. > > CC-ing to fedora-devel-java-list > > Surely there must be a GPL-friendly PNG handler in Java somewhere? How > hard would it be to rewrite this part of FOP? What's the status of > getting a natively-compiled FOP into Fedora? > There's a gdk-pixbuf-based PNG decoder in libgcj's javax.imageio implementation. No encoder though. Probably the most efficient way to get a GPL-compatible Java PNG encoder is to package JMagick: http://www.yeo.id.au/jmagick/ Likely some glue code will be required to make it work with FOP. Have you asked the FOP maintainers why a JMagick back end doesn't exist yet? Tom
