OK. The perfect time is when all in-progress feature branches are merged (since develop currently has the other ordering), but if you want to switch now, then that's fine too.
I guess I'll keep using the jalview on top ordering then ! Jim On 11/06/2015 12:23, Charles Ofoegbu (Staff) wrote: > Same with me. Happy to switch anytime. > > Charles > > > Ofoegbu Tochukwu Charles > Jalview Visual Analytics Developer/Scientist > The Barton Group > Division of Computational Biology > College of Life Sciences > University of Dundee, Dundee, Scotland, UK. > Skype: cofoegbu > www.jalview.org <http://www.jalview.org/> > www.compbio.dundee.ac.uk <http://www.compbio.dundee.ac.uk/> > > > > > > > > > > On 11 Jun 2015, at 12:17 pm, Mungo Carstairs (Staff) > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > >> Happy to switch to >> jalview >> java >> javax >> org >> com >> >> Just say when we're ready to do so! >> >> mungo >> >> Mungo Carstairs >> Jalview Computational Scientist >> The Barton Group >> Division of Computational Biology >> College of Life Sciences >> University of Dundee, Dundee, Scotland, UK. >> www.jalview.org <http://www.jalview.org> >> www.compbio.dundee.ac.uk >> >> ________________________________________ >> From: [email protected] >> <[email protected]> on behalf of Jim Procter >> <[email protected]> >> Sent: 11 June 2015 12:11 >> To: Jalview Development List >> Subject: Re: [Jalview-dev] Import ordering in code >> >> Hi Mungo, and all. >> >> You (and Tochukwu) are ordering like: >> java >> javax >> org >> com >> jalview >> >> I now realise I was the odd-one out. However, I do have strong opinions >> about this ordering, having jalview imports first will make things >> infinitely easier when we carve up the packages into separate OSGi >> modules. >> >> So may I respectfully ask that we put jalview packages at the top ? I'm >> happy for us to do this when we scrub the 2.9 code, rather than right >> now, to avoid unnecessary conflicts (until then, I'll use your ordering, >> Mungo). >> >> Jim. >> >> On 05/06/2015 11:46, Mungo Carstairs (Staff) wrote: >>> >>> Looks like we don't quite have consistency yet which will result in >>> unnecessary diffs with each commit. >>> >>> >>> I have this: >>> >>> <image removed> >>> >>> >>> Does that seem a reasonable ordering, if so can we all configure the >>> same? >>> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Jalview-dev mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://www.compbio.dundee.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/jalview-dev >> >> The University of Dundee is a registered Scottish Charity, No: SC015096 >> _______________________________________________ >> Jalview-dev mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://www.compbio.dundee.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/jalview-dev > > > The University of Dundee is a registered Scottish Charity, No: SC015096 > > > _______________________________________________ > Jalview-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.compbio.dundee.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/jalview-dev _______________________________________________ Jalview-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.compbio.dundee.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/jalview-dev
