Andrew McIntyre wrote: > On 9/9/05, Daniel John Debrunner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>>Thinking of this in the same light as an obfuscator, I sort of thought >>>of the rename/copy coming much later and only for the jar build. >> >>[rest snipped] >> >>I would be very tempted to veto any approach that had the jars >>containing different code to that built in the classes directory and >>usually(?) used for testing by developers. I believe it increases the >>chance for problems being introduced in this process but not caught. > > > Does this mean you would object to both of Kathey's proposed options? > Obfuscator-type modification of the binaries, or ant-based > preprocessing of the source? It wasn't totally clear from this mail if > that was the case.
Both, any solution where the content of the jar files does not match the content of a non-jar build. Dan.
