On Tuesday 01 August 2006 11:25, zdennis wrote:
> Markus Barchfeld wrote:
> > I would neglect backward compatibility to 3.1 for the sake of simplicity.
>
> I agree with Markus. And on the terms of upgrading, is there an easy way to
> port plugins of an existing eclipse 3.1.x installation to 3.2 wi/
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Markus Barchfeld wrote:
> I would neglect backward compatibility to 3.1 for the sake of simplicity.
I agree with Markus. And on the terms of upgrading, is there an easy way to
port plugins of an existing eclipse 3.1.x installation
to 3.2 wi/o having
I would neglect backward compatibility to 3.1 for the sake of simplicity.
Markus
designker wrote:
> Hi,
>
> What is the plan for contributions to RDT in regards to use of new 3.2
> features. As a baby step I have been looking at adding a simple Hello
> World cheatsheet to RDT to accompany the co
Personally, I use 3.2. That would be my vote.
adam williams
On Aug 1, 2006, at 7:59 AM, designker wrote:
> Hi,
>
> What is the plan for contributions to RDT in regards to use of new
> 3.2 features. As a baby step I have been looking at adding a simple
> Hello World cheatsheet to RDT to ac
Hi,What is the plan for contributions to RDT in regards to use of new 3.2 features. As a baby step I have been looking at adding a simple Hello World cheatsheet to RDT to accompany the complex webservices one that already exist. I think newbies to RDT should have something as simple to to get them
