viktor wrote: > > torsdagen den 26 september 2002 kl 10.07 skrev Michael Bartmann: > >> If we modify a thirdparty jar in a way which does not go to the >> thirdparty codebase >> immediately, shouldn't we keep the patched files in the JBoss cvs >> tree and let the patched >> jar file be built by the jboss build process? > > > We could do that but it is more of a fork then ? ... I think that > submitting a patch (source + binary + explanation) at jboss and file > a bug report at hsqldb with a link to the jboss patch would be the > best flow model ? ... > > /peter_f > You are right, it would be a fork, which is a bad thing in the long term. But it depends on meaning of "which doesn't go to the foreign codebase immediatelly". At the moment I cannot find the sources for the JBoss hsqldb.jar at hsqldb, and neither can I find the sources at jboss. We should bring the jboss codebase to a state where we can fix bugs at jboss temporarily (which is a fork in the short term) and then try to get the fix to the hsqldb codebase, eliminating the fork.
Regards, Michael Bartmann ------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf _______________________________________________ Jboss-development mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
