Re: Eclipse

2003-01-02 Thread Mark Wielaard
Hi, On Tue, 2002-12-31 at 20:22, Mark Howard wrote: > You probably have been following your ITP report (119885) and the > debian-java mailing list, but I'd just like to make sure you know that a > few people have packaged this unofficially and there have been offers of > advice from people at Re

Re: Eclipse

2003-01-02 Thread Mark Wielaard
Hi, On Tue, 2002-12-31 at 20:22, Mark Howard wrote: > You probably have been following your ITP report (119885) and the > debian-java mailing list, but I'd just like to make sure you know that a > few people have packaged this unofficially and there have been offers of > advice from people at Re

Re: JAVA_HOME policy?

2003-01-02 Thread Andrew Pimlott
Oooh--I'll answer this! On Thu, Jan 02, 2003 at 05:03:32PM -0500, Joe Phillips wrote: > I've seen package after package (mine included) depend on a > JAVA_HOME environment variable set somewhere, in some script. > Most packages seem to use a config file or init-script to define a > local JAVA_HOME

Re: policy suggestion: API docs are not for users

2003-01-02 Thread Egon Willighagen
On Thursday 02 January 2003 22:36, Joe Phillips wrote: > On Tue, 2002-12-31 at 17:53, T. Alexander Popiel wrote: > > Thus, the API is in the end-user docs, not just the developer docs. > > I suppose that one could argue that anyone trying to use ant for > > their own programs (instead of just using

JAVA_HOME policy?

2003-01-02 Thread Joe Phillips
Recently, I've been building JBOSS/Tomcat packages for internal use and eventual general release (I'll follow-up with another email for the location of my working packages). In doing so, I've had the need to build/back-port various other Java packages to Debian stable. As I've done this, I've see

Re: policy suggestion: API docs are not for users

2003-01-02 Thread Joe Phillips
On Tue, 2002-12-31 at 17:53, T. Alexander Popiel wrote: > Thus, the API is in the end-user docs, not just the developer docs. > I suppose that one could argue that anyone trying to use ant for > their own programs (instead of just using it as an incidental tool > for building someone else's progra

Re: JAVA_HOME policy?

2003-01-02 Thread Andrew Pimlott
Oooh--I'll answer this! On Thu, Jan 02, 2003 at 05:03:32PM -0500, Joe Phillips wrote: > I've seen package after package (mine included) depend on a > JAVA_HOME environment variable set somewhere, in some script. > Most packages seem to use a config file or init-script to define a > local JAVA_HOME

Re: policy suggestion: API docs are not for users

2003-01-02 Thread Mark Howard
On Tue, 2002-12-31 at 22:53, T. Alexander Popiel wrote: > > Ant is as much a framework as a tool; Thanks for the reply. I didn't know that much about ant - I had thought it was a mere application. When you say frequently, how often do you mean. I personally have never had to extend ant (and so

Re: policy suggestion: API docs are not for users

2003-01-02 Thread Egon Willighagen
On Thursday 02 January 2003 22:36, Joe Phillips wrote: > On Tue, 2002-12-31 at 17:53, T. Alexander Popiel wrote: > > Thus, the API is in the end-user docs, not just the developer docs. > > I suppose that one could argue that anyone trying to use ant for > > their own programs (instead of just using

JAVA_HOME policy?

2003-01-02 Thread Joe Phillips
Recently, I've been building JBOSS/Tomcat packages for internal use and eventual general release (I'll follow-up with another email for the location of my working packages). In doing so, I've had the need to build/back-port various other Java packages to Debian stable. As I've done this, I've see

Re: policy suggestion: API docs are not for users

2003-01-02 Thread Joe Phillips
On Tue, 2002-12-31 at 17:53, T. Alexander Popiel wrote: > Thus, the API is in the end-user docs, not just the developer docs. > I suppose that one could argue that anyone trying to use ant for > their own programs (instead of just using it as an incidental tool > for building someone else's progra

Re: policy suggestion: API docs are not for users

2003-01-02 Thread Mark Howard
On Tue, 2002-12-31 at 22:53, T. Alexander Popiel wrote: > > Ant is as much a framework as a tool; Thanks for the reply. I didn't know that much about ant - I had thought it was a mere application. When you say frequently, how often do you mean. I personally have never had to extend ant (and so

Re: Help needed running Swing apps using gij

2003-01-02 Thread Arnaud Vandyck
Max Gilead <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Max Gilead wrote: > > Johan Walles wrote: > > > >> I have a written a self-learning go-moku game in Java and made a > >> jar-file out of it. It runs fine with SUN's java implementation. > >> When I try to run it with gij-3.2 (1:3.2.1-0pre3) I get: > >>

Re: Help needed running Swing apps using gij

2003-01-02 Thread Arnaud Vandyck
Max Gilead <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Max Gilead wrote: > > Johan Walles wrote: > > > >> I have a written a self-learning go-moku game in Java and made a > >> jar-file out of it. It runs fine with SUN's java implementation. > >> When I try to run it with gij-3.2 (1:3.2.1-0pre3) I get: > >>