If this is the only reason, why this feature is scheduled to be removed in 1.0? There's the packageBuildConfig = false setting for that.
We have to use multidex now anyway, but I think these options shouldn't be removed. Is there a short answer for why R members are accumulated? :) 2014. november 12., szerda 3:46:50 UTC+1 időpontban Xavier Ducrohet a következőt írta: > > All android projects generate a BuildConfig class. You cannot have two > libraries with the same package name or these classes will collide. > > > On Tue, Nov 11, 2014 at 2:51 PM, Peter Jakkel <[email protected] > <javascript:>> wrote: > >> Currently giving the same name to library projects is a good way to get >> around reaching the dex limit. >> The reason is that if I have a library lib1 that depends on lib2, than >> lib1 will have all the R identifiers that can be found in lib2. >> On a large scale there are a significant amount of unused variables. >> >> I know about the enforceUniquePackageName flag, but I would like know >> what's the problem with non-unique package names. >> >> >> >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "adt-dev" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to [email protected] <javascript:>. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >> > > > > -- > Xavier Ducrohet > Android SDK Tech Lead > Google Inc. > http://developer.android.com | http://tools.android.com > > Please do not send me questions directly. Thanks! > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "adt-dev" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
