Niclas Hedhman wrote:
On Friday 10 August 2007 23:59, Richard S. Hall wrote:
Another thing is separation of concerns. People may want to make really
fancy launchers, so it make sense to keep the launcher separate. I
prefer a simple launcher, but the idea was that we could also have other
spec
On Friday 10 August 2007 23:59, Richard S. Hall wrote:
> Another thing is separation of concerns. People may want to make really
> fancy launchers, so it make sense to keep the launcher separate. I
> prefer a simple launcher, but the idea was that we could also have other
> special purpose launcher
Another thing is separation of concerns. People may want to make really
fancy launchers, so it make sense to keep the launcher separate. I
prefer a simple launcher, but the idea was that we could also have other
special purpose launchers too.
-> richard
Karl Pauls wrote:
Hi,
I am looking at
On Tuesday 07 August 2007 17:18, Karl Pauls wrote:
> Does that make it more clear?
Perhaps ;o)
Hasn't 72 hours voting period long past... just kidding.
Cheers
--
Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer
I live here; http://tinyurl.com/2qq9er
I work here; http://tinyurl.com/2ymelc
I relax here; ht
> Hi,
>
> I am looking at the two binaries to be released. The only difference I can see
> is;
>
> a) Main contains the Main class and th Main-Class manifest entry.
>
> b) The Framework has a ExportPackage manifest entry.
>
> Maybe I missed something, but is it worthwhile to maintain two such sim
Hi,
I am looking at the two binaries to be released. The only difference I can see
is;
a) Main contains the Main class and th Main-Class manifest entry.
b) The Framework has a ExportPackage manifest entry.
Maybe I missed something, but is it worthwhile to maintain two such similar
artifact
