>yeah, but still we would have to add new definitions. my vision is to have
only some core defs >(mod.date is a good example) there and other ones in
their respective class/package. we can even >move them, should we decide to
broaden their usage later eg. the metadata text.
What about to create
On 10.05.2017 13:57, Giuseppe Aruta wrote:
> Hi Ede,
> sorry, I commit the plugin before reading your mail.
> A) I preferred to have the tags on Tak class so can be easly find them in
> case they can be used for other reasons (I am planning to work around Task
> (=SRS) unit for the next
Hi Ede,
sorry, I commit the plugin before reading your mail.
A) I preferred to have the tags on Tak class so can be easly find them in
case they can be used for other reasons (I am planning to work around Task
(=SRS) unit for the next future)
B) It was already implemented. I didn't give a look
hey Peppe,
A.
would it be possible to implement project tags without having to add static
keys in OJ core? the idea is that each plugin could simply ask for a tag and
get it.
B.
what is the reasoning behind a PROJECT_FILE_KEY? isn't that something that can
be determined during runtime?
C.
Revision: 5442
http://sourceforge.net/p/jump-pilot/code/5442
Author: ma15569
Date: 2017-05-10 08:20:42 + (Wed, 10 May 2017)
Log Message:
---
some improvements on properties definitions
Modified Paths:
--
