On Wed, 2003-04-16 at 17:48, Arnaud Vandyck wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > Mark Howard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Wed, 2003-04-16 at 15:15, Arnaud Vandyck wrote: > > > My opinion is make the separate jar from the classpath source package > > > and don't worry about version problem. Each time you update classpath, > > > the three or four additionnal packages will be upgraded (even if > > > nothing change). I do not think it's a problem. > > They will only be upgraded if the binary packages depend on the same > > version of each other. > > No! they are generated from the same source package! So if you install > swingall.jar (0.5, from classpath 0.5) and classpath upgrade to 0.6, > then you'll have the swingall.jar (0.6, from classpath 0.6) Version 0.6 will be available, but there will be nothing to stop a user from upgrading just part of this unless dependencies/conflicts are added.
> > > I think just adding a 'fastjar' command to make the additionnal jar's > > > and 'install' them into the separate packages is enough. > > Also remove them from the original archive and modify any tools which > > use this so that they also look at the new jar files.. we shouldn't > > duplicate the classes. > > I do not think we have to remove them from the original classpath > package cause it will *always* be the same one!.. I think... :-) So we should have the exact same class file in the original classpath file as now and also repeated in the new libswing-java? -- .''`. Mark Howard : :' : `. `' http://www.tildemh.com `- [EMAIL PROTECTED] | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | [EMAIL PROTECTED]