--- robert burrell donkin
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> (new thread on packaging)
>
> On Thu, 2005-03-03 at 05:34, Brian Stansberry wrote:
> > What I've found is documented at
> >
> >
http://xnet.wanconcepts.com/jcl/furtherAnalysis.html.
>
>
> we need to take a longer look into repackaging. i
> didn't expect that
> altering the distributions would work so well.
I was a little surprised myself, which is why I wanted
to follow Ceki's good example and publish test cases
that could easily be verified (or debunked) by others.
> i'd definitely be willing
> to review patches if someone wants to volunteer to
> alter the build,
> create some good test cases and write up some
> documentation.
I'd be happy to take that on if a consensus is reached
that repackaging is the way to go. Might take me a
bit of time though, as I'm fairly swamped.
> i'd always suspected that static binding was the
> only solution for
> several difficult cases (but using byte code
> engineering rather than
> selective compilation as used in UGLI). the sticking
> point for this (and
> many other cases i'd like to be able to address) is
> that LogFactory is
> too complex and too tightly coupled to a container
> environment.
Yep, all the tests cases basically simulate different
types of containers. But hopefully we're close to
getting the container use cases clean.
Brian
>
> - robert
>
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
__________________________________
Celebrate Yahoo!'s 10th Birthday!
Yahoo! Netrospective: 100 Moments of the Web
http://birthday.yahoo.com/netrospective/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
