On Thu, 2005-04-07 at 16:42 +0100, Gavin Henry wrote: > > <quote who="Tommy Reynolds"> > > I've been looking into using Apache FOP to render PDF's, instead of the > > buggy-as-a-summer-night PassiveTeX. While there is a FOP rewrite under > > way, the latest public version has a show-stopper bug triggered by > > DocBook projects larger than something trivial: the dreaded "duplicate > > id" bug. > > > > Riz Virk <Riz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> kindly sent me a patch that appears to > > eliminate the bug. I tried it out on a ~300 page document I'm writing > > and it rendered PDF just fine. The patch is licensed under the Apache > > license, so it should be OK for our use here. > > > > The patch is attached. > > Superb!!! I can't wait to test it!!! [...snip...] 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. -- Paul W. Frields, RHCE http://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
