You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Original author: eclecticgeek (September 03, 2010 00:48:03)
Since DOMPDF is supposed to be library independent I think it would make sense to have the development of the CPDF renderer be semi-independent of the DOMPDF library. Naturally the two have to be developed somewhat hand in hand, especially since CPDF is the default library of DOMPDF. However, I don't see any reason we can't develop the library in it's own SVN path and use SVN externals to pull it back in. Following standard SVN development practices we can develop in the CPDF trunk and link to tagged versions.
I like this idea, but it certainly deserves scrutiny from everyone else. Worthwhile or not?
Can this step be done now? I noted that there is a repository in Phenx namespace which received just the initial commit three years ago. But the CPDF used in Dompdf got a lot of (special ?) changes since this time.
A repository under dompdf would make more sense too.
Is there anything preventing this to happen? We could make this even a compatible change. But the last namespace change (actually adding one) was part of a minor update too.
Original author: eclecticgeek (September 03, 2010 00:48:03)
Since DOMPDF is supposed to be library independent I think it would make sense to have the development of the CPDF renderer be semi-independent of the DOMPDF library. Naturally the two have to be developed somewhat hand in hand, especially since CPDF is the default library of DOMPDF. However, I don't see any reason we can't develop the library in it's own SVN path and use SVN externals to pull it back in. Following standard SVN development practices we can develop in the CPDF trunk and link to tagged versions.
I like this idea, but it certainly deserves scrutiny from everyone else. Worthwhile or not?
Original issue: http://code.google.com/p/dompdf/issues/detail?id=178
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: