Shyamal Prasad <shya...@member.fsf.org> writes: >>>>>> "Paul" == Paul Landes <lan...@mailc.net> writes: > > Paul> Again, I have thought about forking/canabalizing etc. The > Paul> primary motivation is that the project is large and very > Paul> dependent on CEDET. I have nothing bad to say about CEDET but > Paul> it's current integration with Emacs post 23 has been > Paul> non-compat and created a lot of issues for installation. > > One thing that working on JDEE has forced me to do is learn more about > CEDET, specifically its inclusion into Emacs 23+. The conclusion I've > drawn is this: JDEE should work with GNU Emacs CEDET version alone. It's > the right thing to do for *users* and it resolves the compatibility > issues by making the choice of platform. I would welcome feedback on > this (in particular I'm still unclear about the relationship between the > CEDET and Emacs code bases, though it seems friendly enough).
For me, this is also the motivation behind getting rid of beanshell. There is actually quite a lot of Java in JDEE -- beanshell is not rich enough to do complicated things, so it was only ever used to interact with the JDEE java code. So, JDEE needs building and packaging. This makes it harder to hack, because it doesn't work from a checkout, as well as making inclusion in ELPA/Marmalade/MELPA difficult. Having a JDEE written all in lisp (Emacs + a JVM hosted one) would make life easier. Phil ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Introducing AppDynamics Lite, a free troubleshooting tool for Java/.NET Get 100% visibility into your production application - at no cost. Code-level diagnostics for performance bottlenecks with <2% overhead Download for free and get started troubleshooting in minutes. http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_ap1 _______________________________________________ jdee-devel mailing list jdee-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jdee-devel
