Bug#288009: batik 1.5.1 would break fop

[Wolfgang Baer]

Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 10, 2005 at 06:22:19PM +0100, Wolfgang Baer wrote:
  >>fop is currently not in testing although a valid candidate.
>>A "solution" to the problem would be to upgrade batik to 1.5.1
>>and also to upload a new fop package with an embedded batik
>>library in the current version (with the affected Squiggle
>>class files removed from the library).
> 
> 
> fop is not really a valid candidate, although it appears to be in
> grep-excuses.  Both libfop-java and libfop-java-doc are uninstallable on
> their own right in unstable, because libfop-java depends on fop and fop
> conflicts with libfop-java.  You can safely ignore this package for the time
> being...
> 

There was a small discussion on debian-java the last minutes. I will
prepare a patched fop release which should compile against batik 1.5.1

Should therefore the libfop-java and libfop-java-doc binary packages
removed in the new package ? I think they are transitional packages
not needed anymore as fop is not in testing at all. Am I right ?

(I CC debian-java for this binary package removal question)

Regards,

Wolfgang