Ariel Constenla-Haile wrote:
Hello Juergen,
On Wednesday 25 March 2009, 10:04, Juergen Schmidt wrote:
Hi,
the SDK contains many examples showing the usage of the API etc. The
examples got not really maintained and the workload for testing them is
high.
Some time in the past i have already mentioned that the idea is to
remove some of the examples from the SDK. Mainly examples written in
Java that are now available as NetBeans projects and that can be used
instead. The advantage of the NetBeans projects is that you can easier
browse the code and debug the examples directly from NetBeans.
Karl Weber's arguments convinced me that it is better to have the Java sources
independent from the NetBeans project: this way, instead of having to maintain
the sources for NB, Eclipse, etc., the only sources that have to maintained
are the project-independent ones; then one has the way how to include this
sources in the respective project.
For client applications, NB with the OOo API plugin can have relative sources,
so that the NB user only needs to get (and keep together, otherwise the
relative reference does not work)
api/examples/java/sources
api/examples/java/netbeans
For UNO components, relative references do not work because the plugin has
several issues (the extension manifest, IDL files, etc. must be inside the
project). I can't imagine a good solution with cvs, but svn has external
definitions (though OOo is planning to move away from svn...)
i also like the idea to keep the code independent of a specific IDE. But
you pointed out that it is difficult for complete extensions (have to
analyzed in detail). We offer a good support for NetBeans and probably
for Eclipse exists a NetBeans project importer as vice versa in NB ;-)
It's only a minor overhead for the NB projects and people who are
interested in the code only can easy extract it. For the complete or
better complex examples you need to know what you have to do anyway and
it's not enough to have the code only...
I am flexible, if we can find an easy way to separate it i would be
happy to support it. But i have no time to investigate deeper in this
area. I am happy with the easy to use NB projects so far ;-)
The work needs to be done in some way!!!! If people volunteer to find a
better way and of course to do the work then it will be fine for me and
i will support it where i can.
For smaller examples we have still our code snippets ...
Another
A further advantage of having the examples standalone and documented in
the wiki is that the community can easier help to improve the examples.
submiting code may not require write access to the repository, it can be
submited via issue tracker; but wouldn't anyway this mean to sign the JCA? ...
not so easy in this case...
mmh, not sure but i would expect that people who are interested to help
have no problems with a JCA. But it is nothing new and i see no real
difference.
Juergen
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
