pdf-stapler

[Ranjan Maitra]

Dear friends,

pdf-stapler has finally made it to the Fedora testing repos on Bodhi.

See: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1234210

If you are in need of this alternative/workaround to the discontinued pdftk, please test and provide karma feedback.

Many thanks,
Ranjan

[Matthew Miller]

On Sat, Jan 09, 2016 at 10:09:41AM -0600, Ranjan Maitra wrote:
> Dear friends,
> pdf-stapler has finally made it to the Fedora testing repos on Bodhi. 
> See: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1234210

Nice! Thanks for your long effort on this!

[Franta Hanzlík]

On Sat, 9 Jan 2016 10:09:41 -0600
Ranjan Maitra  wrote:
> Dear friends,
>
> pdf-stapler has finally made it to the Fedora testing repos on Bodhi.
>
> See: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1234210
>
> If you are in need of this alternative/workaround to the discontinued pdftk, please test and provide karma feedback.
>
> Many thanks,
> Ranjan

But pdf-stapler cover only some pdftk possibilities. Has someone on Fedora
solved filling FDF/XFDF data into PDF and export these data from filled
PDF form (preferable by some comman line tool)?
I found that is possible with mcpdf (https://github.com/m-click/mcpdf -
this should be newer direct pdftk replacement), but this package
seems not be in Fedora. Someone managed to successfuly build mcpdf rpm
packages for Fedora?

[Ted Roche]

This was discussed last year. I think the mcpdf utility also depends
on iText, which has some licensing issues.

Here is some of that discussion:

https://ask.fedoraproject.org/en/question/65261/pdftk-not-in-f21/

I also have client applications that depend on pdftk. My solution was
to switch them to Ubuntu.

On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 7:59 AM, Franta Hanzlík  wrote:
> On Sat, 9 Jan 2016 10:09:41 -0600
> Ranjan Maitra  wrote:
> > Dear friends,
> >
> > pdf-stapler has finally made it to the Fedora testing repos on Bodhi.
> >
> > See: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1234210
> >
> > If you are in need of this alternative/workaround to the discontinued pdftk, please test and provide karma feedback.
> >
> > Many thanks,
> > Ranjan
>
> But pdf-stapler cover only some pdftk possibilities. Has someone on Fedora
> solved filling FDF/XFDF data into PDF and export these data from filled
> PDF form (preferable by some comman line tool)?
> I found that is possible with mcpdf (https://github.com/m-click/mcpdf -
> this should be newer direct pdftk replacement), but this package
> seems not be in Fedora. Someone managed to successfuly build mcpdf rpm
> packages for Fedora?
> --
> TIA, Franta Hanzlik (F19/i386)
> --
> users mailing list
> [e-mail]
> To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
> Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
> Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org

[Ian Malone]

On 14 January 2016 at 13:58, Ted Roche  wrote:
> This was discussed last year. I think the mcpdf utility also depends
> on iText, which has some licensing issues.
>
> Here is some of that discussion:
>
> https://ask.fedoraproject.org/en/question/65261/pdftk-not-in-f21/
>
> I also have client applications that depend on pdftk. My solution was
> to switch them to Ubuntu.

I'm not sure that was the problem last time, there was also something
about libgcj being needed. I know this keeps going round in circles,
so apologies if I'm repeating old information, but I think this is
what killed it when rpmfusion tried,
http://lists.rpmfusion.org/pipermail/rpmfusion-developers/2009-January/00367...

[Ian Malone]

On 14 January 2016 at 18:19, Ian Malone  wrote:
> On 14 January 2016 at 13:58, Ted Roche  wrote:
> > This was discussed last year. I think the mcpdf utility also depends
> > on iText, which has some licensing issues.
> >
> > Here is some of that discussion:
> >
> > https://ask.fedoraproject.org/en/question/65261/pdftk-not-in-f21/
> >
> > I also have client applications that depend on pdftk. My solution was
> > to switch them to Ubuntu.
>
> I'm not sure that was the problem last time, there was also something
> about libgcj being needed. I know this keeps going round in circles,
> so apologies if I'm repeating old information, but I think this is
> what killed it when rpmfusion tried,
> http://lists.rpmfusion.org/pipermail/rpmfusion-developers/2009-January/00367...

Current itext license in case mcpdf is actually a possibility. Would
probably need someone from fedora legal to check it's acceptable as
they've used some modifications, which may be allowed by the APL, but
I know itext has a little history with making non-free modifications
to free licenses:
https://github.com/itext/itextpdf/blob/master/LICENSE.md

[Raman Gupta]

On 01/14/2016 01:27 PM, Ian Malone wrote:
> On 14 January 2016 at 18:19, Ian Malone  wrote:
> > On 14 January 2016 at 13:58, Ted Roche  wrote:
> > > This was discussed last year. I think the mcpdf utility also depends
> > > on iText, which has some licensing issues.
> > >
> > > Here is some of that discussion:
> > >
> > > https://ask.fedoraproject.org/en/question/65261/pdftk-not-in-f21/
> > >
> > > I also have client applications that depend on pdftk. My solution was
> > > to switch them to Ubuntu.
> >
> > I'm not sure that was the problem last time, there was also something
> > about libgcj being needed. I know this keeps going round in circles,
> > so apologies if I'm repeating old information, but I think this is
> > what killed it when rpmfusion tried,
> > http://lists.rpmfusion.org/pipermail/rpmfusion-developers/2009-January/00367...
>
> Current itext license in case mcpdf is actually a possibility. Would
> probably need someone from fedora legal to check it's acceptable as
> they've used some modifications, which may be allowed by the APL, but
> I know itext has a little history with making non-free modifications
> to free licenses:
> https://github.com/itext/itextpdf/blob/master/LICENSE.md

No, I believe the ambiguous additional language at the end of that
page, requiring a commercial license in certain situations, is the
actual problem. Here is the relevant post from Redhat legal:

https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/legal/2011-June/001656.html

And since mcpdf uses itext, it will have the same issue. In any case,
mcpdf is, at least currently, woefully short of being a pdftk
replacement. And it doesn't seem the author or anyone else is working
to improve that situation -- the last commit that added functionality
is two years ago (https://github.com/m-click/mcpdf). There is an mcpdf
copr though (I haven't used it):

https://copr.fedoraproject.org/coprs/thomasfedb/mcpdf/

Pdf-stapler at least provides the select/cat capability of pdftk,
which mcpdf does not.

Regards,
Raman

[Heinz Diehl]

On 14.01.2016, Raman Gupta wrote:
> Pdf-stapler at least provides the select/cat capability of pdftk,
> which mcpdf does not.

You can do the most with PDF-shuffler, in a graphical way.

[htd@chiara ~]$ rpm -qa | grep -i pdfshuffler
pdfshuffler-0.6.0-7.fc23.noarch

[Raman Gupta]

On 01/14/2016 04:33 PM, Heinz Diehl wrote:
> On 14.01.2016, Raman Gupta wrote:
> > Pdf-stapler at least provides the select/cat capability of pdftk,
> > which mcpdf does not.
>
> You can do the most with PDF-shuffler, in a graphical way.
>
> [htd@chiara ~]$ rpm -qa | grep -i pdfshuffler
> pdfshuffler-0.6.0-7.fc23.noarch

Yup, pdfshuffler is good for one-offs. But you can't script it.

[Ian Malone]

On 14 January 2016 at 18:38, Raman Gupta  wrote:
> On 01/14/2016 01:27 PM, Ian Malone wrote:
> > On 14 January 2016 at 18:19, Ian Malone  wrote:
> > > On 14 January 2016 at 13:58, Ted Roche  wrote:
> > > > This was discussed last year. I think the mcpdf utility also depends
> > > > on iText, which has some licensing issues.
> > > >
> > > > Here is some of that discussion:
> > > >
> > > > https://ask.fedoraproject.org/en/question/65261/pdftk-not-in-f21/
> > > >
> > > > I also have client applications that depend on pdftk. My solution was
> > > > to switch them to Ubuntu.
> > >
> > > I'm not sure that was the problem last time, there was also something
> > > about libgcj being needed. I know this keeps going round in circles,
> > > so apologies if I'm repeating old information, but I think this is
> > > what killed it when rpmfusion tried,
> > > http://lists.rpmfusion.org/pipermail/rpmfusion-developers/2009-January/00367...
> >
> > Current itext license in case mcpdf is actually a possibility. Would
> > probably need someone from fedora legal to check it's acceptable as
> > they've used some modifications, which may be allowed by the APL, but
> > I know itext has a little history with making non-free modifications
> > to free licenses:
> > https://github.com/itext/itextpdf/blob/master/LICENSE.md
>
> No, I believe the ambiguous additional language at the end of that
> page, requiring a commercial license in certain situations, is the
> actual problem. Here is the relevant post from Redhat legal:
>
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/legal/2011-June/001656.html

Fairly comprehensive then. I didn't look back far enough...

[Ian Malone]

On 9 January 2016 at 16:09, Ranjan Maitra  wrote:
> Dear friends,
>
> pdf-stapler has finally made it to the Fedora testing repos on Bodhi.
>
> See: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1234210
>
> If you are in need of this alternative/workaround to the discontinued pdftk, please test and provide karma feedback.
>
> Many thanks,
> Ranjan

Thanks, have missed having pdftk around. Will have a look in a while
if karma still required. Anything in particular need checking?

[Ranjan Maitra]

On Thu, 14 Jan 2016 18:22:24 +0000 Ian Malone  wrote:
> On 9 January 2016 at 16:09, Ranjan Maitra  wrote:
> > Dear friends,
> >
> > pdf-stapler has finally made it to the Fedora testing repos on Bodhi.
> >
> > See: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1234210
> >
> > If you are in need of this alternative/workaround to the discontinued pdftk, please test and provide karma feedback.
> >
> > Many thanks,
> > Ranjan
>
> Thanks, have missed having pdftk around. Will have a look in a while
> if karma still required. Anything in particular need checking?

Karma would be good! Nothing in particular requires checking: everything has worked for me for months, perhaps a year, but my environment is not exactly the same as that of everybody else.

I think the 5-day window expires tomorrow so karma or not I intend to push it when given the chance.

Ranjan

____________________________________________________________
FREE 3D EARTH SCREENSAVER - Watch the Earth right on your desktop!
Check it out at http://www.inbox.com/earth