(In reply to comment #13)
> (In reply to comment #12)
> > As discussed, this commit has been reverted as the user can set the headless
> > or any other JVM argument if they wish to do so. These arguments, however,
> > should not be set by default.
> > Glenn, should I set the status of this to invalid since it's not actually a
> > bug? Or wontfix? Or should I just leave it be?
> I would like to have a better understanding if most usage of FOP requires
> headed than headless. Since the FOP tests apparently work with headless
> mode, I have to wonder if headless is the more typical usage.
The junit tests don't run in a headless environment, a HeadlessException. So I'm not sure what is meant by "typical usage".
> A better fix would be to keep this original fix, and then change to headed
> if AWT output is used if the user did not explicitly set headed or headless.
> In other words, I think that switching to headed by default in order to fix
> AWT usage is the wrong approach. I think we should use headless by default.
The problem with that patch is that it forces a headless environment, where as previously the user had the option of a headless environment (with the -Djava.awt.headless=true). No code change is needed in for a headless environment. However with this patch applied a code change is needed, and in several places.
Aside from that, a graphical head is needed for use of the AWT renderer but also for SVG as Batik's reliance on the AWT system hasn't been addressed. The use of SVG in the user base is vast, so I'm not sure it's fair to say "typical usage" doesn't require a headless environment. Fixing Batik is not a small task and not one that it seems anyone is in any rush to fix.