<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<title></title>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
<pre id="line194"><span class="attribute-value">It is in the zip under the source directory:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="ftp://ftp.gjt.org/pub/time/java/tar/javatar-2.5.zip">ftp://ftp.gjt.org/pub/time/java/tar/javatar-2.5.zip</a></span></pre>
<br>
<br>
Joe Walker wrote:<br>
<blockquote cite="mid5dd474260408260600181ab504@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">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 <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:dmsmith555@yahoo.com"><dmsmith555@yahoo.com></a> wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Mark Goodwin wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">I think tar.jar is used by both installers to unpack mods.tar.gz -
perhaps removing it would be a bad idea.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">Yes, it would be very bad.
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">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)?
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">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.
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">On Thu, 26 Aug 2004 07:25:42 -0400, DM Smith <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:dmsmith555@yahoo.com"><dmsmith555@yahoo.com></a> wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">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
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
jsword-devel mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:jsword-devel@crosswire.org">jsword-devel@crosswire.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/jsword-devel">http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/jsword-devel</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->_______________________________________________
jsword-devel mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:jsword-devel@crosswire.org">jsword-devel@crosswire.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/jsword-devel">http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/jsword-devel</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>