Since it makes less effort for IntelliJ, I think, it should remain as it is.
Tom At 11:40 27.03.02 +0000, you wrote: > > It introduces more risks for the IntelliJ guys, > > > If somebody patches his idea incorrectly, they are spending effort on > > "Ghost" bugs because somebody did forget to apply a patch. > > I guess this is for them the safest way, and the most efficient for them. > >Hmmm, but isn't there a patch tool available for Java already? This would >be relatively simple to write, especially if you only patch complete >files. i.e. at build time it compares the new .jar with the old .jar, >creating a changes.jar containing only the files that have changed. > >Then at the client end you run a small app that generates a new idea .jar >from the one on the user's machine and the changes.jar they downloaded. > >Of course, this means you need some versioning info in the idea .jar so >that patches are only applied to correct versions. > >It's easy for us with permanent internet connections to forget about the >people who have slow dial-up. Patches are "eco-friendly" in the internet >sense, too. > >This isn't a pressing problem � but if there is a tool out there already >that does it, why not use it? WISE Installer used to do a fantastic job >of this for windows .exe installs � surely someone has done this for >Java. > >Marc > > > >_______________________________________________ >Eap-list mailing list >[EMAIL PROTECTED] >http://www.intellij.com/mailman/listinfo/eap-list _______________________________________________ Eap-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.intellij.com/mailman/listinfo/eap-list
