[jsword-devel] Usability testing ...

[Joe Walker]

I also like 3, but I expect that it is more work for everyone
concerned than 1 and 2.
I think 2 is the long term solution. Post 1.0 I can't see us holding
back from JDK 5 features once it is golden.
So in the short term I favour 1b.

I think the code is only available through CVS, I'll have a look.

Joe.

On Thu, 26 Aug 2004 08:24:01 -0400, DM Smith <dmsmith555 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Mark Goodwin wrote:
> 
> >I think tar.jar is used by both installers to unpack mods.tar.gz -
> >perhaps removing it would be a bad idea.
> >
> >
> Yes, it would be very bad.
> 
> >mods.tar.gz is used to obtain the metadata on the available books; can
> >you think of an alternative way of getting this (preferably without
> >resorting to parsing html)?
> >
> >
> The Java Tar code is public domain, not licensed. We can do with it as
> we see fit.
> 
> The options I see are:
> 1) Distribute tar.jar via a different mechanism.
>     a) put the code into another jar that does not have the problem
>     b) put the code into common as com.ice, exactly as is.
>     c) put the code into common as org.crosswire.tar, keeping only what
> we need.
>         While I generally am against maintaining 3rd party code, we use
> very little of the package
>         and it is really straightforward.
> 2) Force everyone to upgrade to Java 1.4.2 or greater.
> 3) Convince the Sword community to maintain both a mods.d.zip and a
> mods.d.tar.gz.
> 
> Personally, I like the last one the best. It removes one more dependency
> in our code.
> 
> 
> 
> >On Thu, 26 Aug 2004 07:25:42 -0400, DM Smith <dmsmith555 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Joe,
> >>Would you comment out these jars in the bibledesktop.jnlp? (I think that
> >>this is easier than sending a patch for a single file.) My thought is
> >>that the jnlp is for the average user, zips for the tinkerer and cvs for
> >>developers. So jnlp should not bring down extras, the zips should
> >>contain all the jars and cvs, well, has everything.
> >>
> >><!-- These are optional. Probably of use only to developers at this point.
> >>    <jar href="lucene-1.3-final.jar"/>
> >>    <jar href="tar.jar"/>
> >>-->
> >>
> >>Also, I am curious, what leads you to believe that it is a problem w/
> >>1.4.1? I did check the jar and it is signed.
> >>
> >>DM
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> 
> _______________________________________________
> jsword-devel mailing list
> jsword-devel at crosswire.org
> http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/jsword-devel
>