Greg, Wow, this escalated quickly. Not being snarky, and I do get the impression that you're now lecturing me. Let's just all take a step back.
I am not implying anything about incompatibilities with net beans or any other IDE. I'm not sure why you went there. You're right about two conversations, I'm interested in the RMIClassLoader improvements that were done. It's that simple. I'll await Peter's reply. Dennis Sent from my iPhone > On Jun 5, 2015, at 1:48 PM, Greg Trasuk <tras...@stratuscom.com> wrote: > > > Hi Dennis: > > Your response sounds a little snarky to me, but that may be just email not > conveying tone correctly, or the curse of the iPhone. > > If I’m not mistaken, the changes you’re talking about are contained in > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/RIVER-336 > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/RIVER-336>. The Jira issue says the > patch was integrated into river-trunk in 2012. Looking at the trunk, it > looks like sjiskes integrated it, changing the name of the new class loader > from CodebaseAccessClassLoader to RiverClassLoader. From what I can tell, it > isn’t in the qa_refactor branch, but Peter added additional patch files to > the Jira issue, so I wonder if he integrated it somewhere into qa_refactor > under a different name. Peter? > > In any case, given all the misinformation and lack of information that’s out > there regarding River development, I think it’s important that we don’t give > the impression that River is incompatible with IDE’s. In the email trail > below, there is a question about developing under NetBeans, then a comment > that it “should run fine within NetBeans”, then some talk about NetBeans > Security Manager, and finally, you ask about changes to improve NetBeans > compatibility. > > To the keen observer, it’s clear that there are two different conversations > going on here - one is about using NetBeans as a development environment; the > other is about starting up River services or clients inside the Netbeans > Platform. The casual observer, on the other hand, might only pick up on > “compatibility with NetBeans”, hence my comment that we need to be clear what > is meant by “run within NetBeans”. > > To be totally clear, any environment where you can edit java files, including > NetBeans or Eclipse, is fine for poking around in the River source code. The > build is executed by Ant using the ‘build.xml’ script. > > Cheers, > > Greg Trasuk > >> On Jun 5, 2015, at 11:54 AM, Dennis Reedy <dennis.re...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> It's the RMIClassLoader work that was done, thought I had made that clear. >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> >>> On Jun 5, 2015, at 11:06 AM, Greg Trasuk <tras...@stratuscom.com> wrote: >>> >>> >>> Need to define “run within NetBeans”. I think Gregg’s work you’re thinking >>> of was about being able to build NetBeans plugins that could access >>> services and perhaps export services. >>> >>> “Running” a program from within Netbeans, i.e. invoking the Ant script or >>> executing “java …” works fine as-is. And I think Peter was talking about >>> developing with NetBeans, which also is just fine. The only thing that is >>> bit of a pain with either NetBeans or Eclipse on the JTSK core project is >>> getting all the libraries added to the IDE’s class path so that >>> type-ahead, etc, work OK. In either one, you need to edit the project’s >>> properties. It’s a little easier with a Mavenized project like the >>> river-examples projects, because the IDE picks up on the dependencies >>> called out in the POM. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> >>> Greg Trasuk >>> >>>> On Jun 5, 2015, at 9:45 AM, Dennis Reedy <dennis.re...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi Gregg, >>>> >>>> IIRC, you did some work with the RMIClassLoader that greatly improved >>>> interoperability with NB. I don't recall seeing it in the qa-refactor >>>> branch. I think it's really important to have that work in the next >>>> release. >>>> >>>> Any chance you can you merge it into the qa-refactor-namespace branch? >>>> >>>> Thanks >>>> >>>> Dennis >>>> >>>> Sent from my iPhone >>>> >>>>> On Jun 5, 2015, at 9:04 AM, Gregg Wonderly <gregg...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Netbeans used to start with a custom SecurityManager implementation which >>>>> was not replaceable in an APP nor the IDE itself. I think this was >>>>> changed to be pluggable, but I just don’t remember the details. >>>>> >>>>> Gregg >>>>> >>>>>> On Jun 2, 2015, at 6:14 AM, Peter <j...@zeus.net.au> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Yes, >>>>>> >>>>>> Should run fine from within Netbeans,I haven't tried Eclipse, but it >>>>>> should also work. Unlike previous builds, it doesn't need cigwin and it >>>>>> builds on jvm's other than Sun's, such as IBM's J9. >>>>>> >>>>>> Peter. >>>>>> >>>>>>> On 27/05/2015 6:09 PM, Patricia Shanahan wrote: >>>>>>> I'll check out that branch and take a look. Any tips on which tool >>>>>>> chain to use to compile it on a Windows 8.1 system? >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 5/26/2015 8:30 PM, Dennis Reedy wrote: >>>>>>>> Hi Patricia, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I’ve done the work in the river/jtsk/skunk/qa-refactor-namespace >>>>>>>> branch, having eyes and hands on this would be great! >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Thanks >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Dennis >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On May 26, 2015, at 1025PM, Patricia Shanahan <p...@acm.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On 5/2/2015 2:16 PM, Dennis Reedy wrote: >>>>>>>>>> The vote for the namespace change from com.sun.jini and com.artima to >>>>>>>>>> org.apache.river has passed. I’ll begin this work in the >>>>>>>>>> skunk/qa_refactor branch. I might require assistance in testing, so >>>>>>>>>> volunteers would be appreciated. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Is this the right time to volunteer? If so, what would you like me to >>>>>>>>> do? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Patricia >
