From owner-freebsd-www@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Aug 21 08:57:01 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: www@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B145106566B; Tue, 21 Aug 2012 08:57:01 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gabor@FreeBSD.org) Received: from server.mypc.hu (server.mypc.hu [87.229.73.95]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2B82C8FC0C; Tue, 21 Aug 2012 08:57:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: from server.mypc.hu (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by server.mypc.hu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 788F714E7F7E; Tue, 21 Aug 2012 10:56:59 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at server.mypc.hu Received: from server.mypc.hu ([127.0.0.1]) by server.mypc.hu (server.mypc.hu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id ldTKmgGg1rn7; Tue, 21 Aug 2012 10:56:56 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [192.168.1.102] (D94162B4.catv.pool.telekom.hu [217.65.98.180]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by server.mypc.hu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6346314E7F7C; Tue, 21 Aug 2012 10:56:56 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <50334D56.6020809@FreeBSD.org> Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2012 10:56:54 +0200 From: Gabor Kovesdan User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:13.0) Gecko/20120614 Thunderbird/13.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Warren Block References: <50326A70.5020009@FreeBSD.org> <5032C4BE.5080209@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 1.4.3 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: doceng@FreeBSD.org, doc@FreeBSD.org, www@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: [CALL FOR REVIEW] doc and www converted to XML X-BeenThere: freebsd-www@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: FreeBSD Project Webmasters List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2012 08:57:01 -0000 Em 21-08-2012 02:16, Warren Block escreveu: > Agreed. I think the primary benefit would be taking advantage of a > toolchain that someone else maintains. I don't know how well it would > work for us. The nice thing is that with DocBook XML, the choice > becomes available. I'm not saying either that it is useless. It can be a good source of ideas, I just wouldn't adopt it as is. >> Anyway, FOP is the best free renderer out for PDF but it depends on >> Java. Publican also uses FOP. Personally, I think we should get a >> compromise and depend on Java or otherwise we never will have modern >> features and outlook in our PDF documents. > > With OpenJDK, Java is a lot less of a hassle than previously. I'm not following the OpenJDK development these days. Does it require any bootstrap JDK to build? And once built, can we distribute it freely as a normal package? Gabor