Re: [Jmol-developers] Jmol 11.6 for the record

2008-10-10 Thread Robert Hanson
Ah, missed this message. Maybe that's all there is to it. OK. We do check to see that we are only loading languages that are on the list. So maybe this is all we need. On Thu, Oct 9, 2008 at 11:52 PM, Nicolas Vervelle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > > > On Fri, Oct 10, 2008 at 1:00 AM, Robert Hanson

Re: [Jmol-developers] Jmol 11.6 for the record

2008-10-09 Thread Nicolas Vervelle
On Fri, Oct 10, 2008 at 1:00 AM, Robert Hanson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > However, if a file is missing, then the server is going to send a "no file > found" message that is going to cause a Jmol crash. > Not good. Since we have the list of languages in GT, we could try to get the file only if

Re: [Jmol-developers] Jmol 11.6 for the record

2008-10-09 Thread Robert Hanson
all OK for me. Except I'm having that same problem I've had before with Eclipse not properly indicating which options I've selected for the ant build. I was able nonetheless to get both applets made as well as the application, and everything works as advertised. Each language jar file is read off t

Re: [Jmol-developers] Jmol 11.6 for the record

2008-10-09 Thread Angel Herráez
I've done a local build from revision 10030 and the unsigned applet seems to work OK; opens in Spanish, changes languages from the popup menu withou a hitch (I'd even say that quicker than before). I tried English, French, Portuguese, back to Spanish. However, the app gets hung at the "Initia

Re: [Jmol-developers] Jmol 11.6 for the record

2008-10-09 Thread Nicolas Vervelle
Modifications done, it really needs some testing (I haven't tested the applet) Nico On Thu, Oct 9, 2008 at 3:47 PM, Nicolas Vervelle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > Ok, I will commit some modifications this evening. > > With the modifications I have made (GT.java and build-i18n.xml), Jmol.jar > is w

Re: [Jmol-developers] Jmol 11.6 for the record

2008-10-09 Thread Nicolas Vervelle
Ok, I will commit some modifications this evening. With the modifications I have made (GT.java and build-i18n.xml), Jmol.jar is working correctly and probably JmolApplet.jar also. I have to modify the build process for the splitted applet jars. I have planned to use a loop for the jars (like in b

Re: [Jmol-developers] Jmol 11.6 for the record

2008-10-09 Thread Robert Hanson
OK, that sounds fine. We'll go with multiple JAR files. As I recall, we need to: 1) just include all subdirectory business in Jmol.jar and JmolApplet.jar (no changes there?) 2) JmolApplet0.jar and JmolAppletSigned0.jar -- We need to check to see if we need separate manifests for each translation

Re: [Jmol-developers] Jmol 11.6 for the record

2008-10-09 Thread Robert Hanson
Henry, I think there has to be a balance between allowing new features and preserving the integrity of the initial publication. The nightmare of some upgrade breaking a published work is disturbing. An author has published what they published. I'm not sure it would be appropriate to automatically a

Re: [Jmol-developers] Jmol 11.6 for the record

2008-10-09 Thread Nicolas Vervelle
Hi, On Wed, Oct 8, 2008 at 11:19 PM, Robert Hanson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > They have to be in separate packages. Once one class of a package is > accessed, all classes of that package must be loaded. So each has to be in > its own package. It's own name space. > Ok, it's easy to do by putti

Re: [Jmol-developers] Jmol 11.6 for the record

2008-10-09 Thread Angel Herráez
A few comments/ideas raised by Henry's post: > I also suspect that there must be a very wide spread of versions in that > embedding, possibly going back to Jmol 10 and even earlier. My experience is > that Jmol has excellent backward compatibility, and that there is a high > probability that

Re: [Jmol-developers] Jmol 11.6 for the record

2008-10-09 Thread Rolf Huehne
Rzepa, Henry wrote: > Egon has just posted download statistics for Jmol to the users list. > > I suspect Jmol has been embedded in 100s, if not 1000s (or even 10Ks worth) > of journal pages. I also suspect that there must be a very wide spread of > versions in that embedding, possibly going b

Re: [Jmol-developers] Jmol 11.6 for the record

2008-10-09 Thread Rzepa, Henry
Egon has just posted download statistics for Jmol to the users list. I suspect Jmol has been embedded in 100s, if not 1000s (or even 10Ks worth) of journal pages. I also suspect that there must be a very wide spread of versions in that embedding, possibly going back to Jmol 10 and even earlie

Re: [Jmol-developers] Jmol 11.6 for the record

2008-10-08 Thread Robert Hanson
They have to be in separate packages. Once one class of a package is accessed, all classes of that package must be loaded. So each has to be in its own package. It's own name space. BUT I have another idea. We don't necessarily have to use the gettext routines for creating classes this way. We c

Re: [Jmol-developers] Jmol 11.6 for the record

2008-10-08 Thread Nicolas Vervelle
On Wed, Oct 8, 2008 at 12:17 AM, Robert Hanson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > -- translation en_GB > > -- commented out in GT.java > -- will be back in as soon as we can get those translations spun off out > of one large JAR file. I'm hoping Nico can tackle that. > Hi Bob, What are the condit