Hi all, @Greg: >Well, you'd basically be talking about moving just the Drawing class into its own JAR, which doesn't seem worth it. Classes to more would be: Drawing, Image, SVGDiagramSerializer classes all inside Wtk. Of course Image could be splitted in one without SVG support, and another extending it (if possible) in the new project with SVG support. I think that removing such dependency from core Wtk would be useful, but I agree that it requires some effort, but I'm ready to do it :-) .
>You'd also need to remove the support in the Image class for loading Drawings, so you'd no longer be able to do this: <ImageView image="@foo.png"/> Excuse me (you know that I know little on many Pivot components), why png ? Or I could have (moved) class names equals to original ones (but with a little different package if it's not a problem). @Andrei: I just reassigned to me the ticket for the mavenization of Pivot, but assigned to 3.0 because probably we have to wait for good time for do it :-) . >1) FWIW, I am building kitfox as a separate dependency: Yes, this is another small problem that could be removed moving classes as I proposed. >2) if you really get to making changes to your names, I suggest you make pivot module names consistent: Yes, and I'd like to do this even for the 2.1 release and it will be visible only to developers downloading Pivot sources from the trunk. >pivot jar names should match mvn module names should match mvn artifact names should match osgi bundle names Yes, I agree. So, objections to moving classes for the 2.1 ? Bye, Sandro -- View this message in context: http://apache-pivot-developers.417237.n3.nabble.com/Move-Wtk-classes-related-to-SVGSalamander-in-a-dedicated-wtk-svg-or-similar-subproject-inside-Pivot-tp3317312p3319677.html Sent from the Apache Pivot - Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
