> However, they are aware at least that other projects are interested in > using poppler proper, and I think I told them we are already using it. > We even talked about the possibility to provide a backend-free version > with a clean API. AFAIR, the only reason for not providing it was that > nobody had time to do it. I don't have an idea how this API should like, but I would be happy to join such project. (Better to help then deal with ABI breakages in libpoppler). > It's completely inacceptable for pdftex to acquire a dependency on gtk > or qt. It's just glib and not gtk, but I see your point. > If using plain libpoppler turns out to be impossible, we'd > rather switch back to using our embedded xpdf copy and have 10 security > releases during each release cycle. I can always switch to debian SONAMEs if there is a need to, but simple library with clearly define API and no ABI breakages would be much better. Ondrej. -- Ondřej Surý <ondrej@sury.org> http://blog.rfc1925.org/
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part