On Thu, 2006-06-29 at 15:09 -0700, Casey Marshall wrote: > On Jun 29, 2006, at 2:35 AM, Roman Kennke wrote: > > > Hi Casey, > > > >> Oh, and also, why can't we include the Escher source in external/? It > >> sounds to me like it needs to be forked anyway (especially if it's > >> going to get Xauthority handling, which it definitely needs). Is the > >> author even working on it any more? > > > > Escher is an external library, just like GTK or Qt. Only that it > > happens > > to be programmed in Java. The original author isn't actively > > working on > > it atm. BUT I do, and he made me co-maintainer of Escher. I already > > did > > a couple of fixes to get the X peers working and will do a realease > > soon. > > > > I agree, having this in external/ would make things easier, but it > > seems > > a cleaner approach to handle it like other libs that we depend on. > > What > > do others think? > > > > I'd agree that treating it like just another library is a good > option, but it's just that I don't think Java library installation > handling is quite as consistent as shared libraries. I mean, it's > been a while since I've done a lot of user-level Java stuff on Linux, > but my understanding was that each distribution still had its own > bizarre way of installing Java libraries. > > And, I'm a little concerned that few people will have Escher > installed, or will be able to install it through their distribution, > whereas GTK or Qt are things that a user rarely has to worry about, > because they're a part if his system. > > I mean, if there aren't any fatal issues with including Escher in > external/, then why not do so?
I second that. Putting it in external/ would be best, at least until the distributions pick up on it and start including it in a uniform way. -- Andrew :-) Escape the Java Trap with GNU Classpath! http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/java-trap.html public class gcj extends Freedom implements Java { ... }
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
