Glen Mazza wrote: > > > your coding easier, you may just want to place > > that > > > class in apps and not bother with the Control > > package. > > > > I'm don't care much which package it is in. I kind > > of thought that you and > > Jeremias were heading toward having apps only have > > command-line level and > > API stuff in it > > Apps is good for embedded as well. And it's looking > much better as of late--it may be our cleanest-coded > package now. It appears that Document and > Driver/Session (I'm setting aside the issue of when we > can rename that class, or just duplicate the class > name for backwards compatiblity, etc., etc.) should be > in the same package--if you're in agreement, let me > know. I'll happily get the busywork of moving > Document to the apps package out of the way.
I am in agreement that they should be in the same package. If we are sure that we don't mind having the API/command-line/embedded stuff in the same package, then please feel free to move Document to apps. Actually my JBuilder has a nice refactor task that does this for almost free, so, unless you have something similar at hand, perhaps I should do that. Victor Mote --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
