Hi Juergen,
it seems that we have a problem here. The design of the scripting framework doesn't aloow to use it via UNO but it provides a Java interface only. In the past we were able to reference the ScriptingFramework.jar by luck even nobody has really thought about it. Now that isn't possible anymore.
Why? What is the cause and the reasoning?

I don't have and don't know a quick solution for this problem. I would suggest that you try to put the ScriptingFramework.jar in your oxt and ship it together if it works. And please file an issue for that problem.

The scripting framework may needs some general rework/redesign.
Well, even if that is the case, it is being employed by OOo 300, so in principle it looks like it is working fine.

Sorry for that, but i don't see a chance to fix it for 3.0.
sorry for my ignorance, I still do not understand:

   * there is an OOo framework for scripting implemented in Java,
   * using it to add a new scripting language to OOo has been working
     since OOo 1.x (!),
   * there is a new version of OOo 3.x which makes changes to the
     configuration and how class loaders work (is their policy
     documented somewhere?) and as a result (at least this is how it
     apperars from the "outside") the genuine OOo scripting framework
     is not usable anymore? Although the scripting providers for Rhino
     (Javascript), BeanShell and Java are available and operational??
         o So what is the trick you apply to let Rhino, BeanShell and
           Java be still usable on OOo 3.x ?
         o Is it some configuration trick? If so, can we take advantage
           of it too?

Anyway, I will try (just tight on time right now, so it'll take some time) to package the DEV300/m24 ScriptingFramework.jar into the ScriptingProviderForooRexx.jar to see whether that makes a difference. (But if it does, it certainly does not look like it is o.k. as the very same DEV300/m24 ScriptingFramework.jar is already installed!)

It would be interesting to learn about the reasons, motivations, such that one would become able to understand (and maybe question) these decisions.

Regards,

---rony

Reply via email to