[jdom-interest] RE: jdom-interest digest, Vol 1 #483 - 3 msgs
Sam.Deel at sterling-fsg.com
Fri Feb 23 09:15:00 PST 2001
If this going under the JCP, do they have a way the they expect "about"
info/version to be provided? Maybe they can provide guidance.
From: steven.gould at cgiusa.com
To: jdom-interest at jdom.org
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 10:03:31 -0600
Organization: CGI (USA)
Subject: Re: [jdom-interest] Re: TODO.TXT: jdom.jar main method and class
Joseph Bowbeer wrote:
> I'm familiar with executable .jar files, but JDOM is not a server, and I
> don't know of any pure libraries that are executable.
> I'm concerned about adding anything to the default package. (What if
> everyone did that?)
I agree. I put it in the default package initially based on some of Jason's
comments. However, I then decided that putting anything in the default
"dangerous". Like you say, "what if everyone did that?" Isn't that defeating
purpose of packages in the first place?
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jason Hunter" <jhunter at collab.net>
> To: "Joseph Bowbeer" <jozart at csi.com>
> Cc: <jdom-interest at jdom.org>
> Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2001 9:08 PM
> Subject: Re: [jdom-interest] Re: TODO.TXT: jdom.jar main method and class
> > I'm wondering about the idea of making jdom.jar executable.
> > I wouldn't expect anything in my /lib/ext to be executable, and I'm a
> > concerned about adding a Main class to the default package in every JDOM
> > user's classpath.
> It's common for JAR files these days to be executable. For example, you
> start the Orion app server by executing its JAR. In the manifest you
> can point at a class to execute. For this scheme we'll have a little
> Main class that uses the JDOM classes to read and display its info.xml
> information. Most packages would just leave info.xml static for manual
> reading, but we can have our easter egg. :-)
Jason, I liked your earlier ideas about changing "jdom-info" to a more
"info" document and filename. I'll make those changes.
> > Failing that, would it be preferable to put Main in *some* package? For
> > example: org.jdom.info
> That would make it part of JDOM itself. If it's not in org.jdom it's
> ancillary. In other words, when we write the JDOM spec, this won't be
> in there.
Why won't it be in there? If it's an issue here, then perhaps it should be
spec. I mean, perhaps the JDOM spec. should include some way of accessing
information, etc. - a little like convention that most Windows (MS and X)
Help, About dialog. That really isn't a core part of the product, but it
serves a very valuable purpose.
To control your jdom-interest membership:
End of jdom-interest Digest
More information about the jdom-interest