What i mean is that with our products, we'll always provide an implementation by default
and if a user prefer an other one, he'll change the provider implementation.
I think we must be independant of implementation in scm url and it must be the user that
choose the implementation like a user ca
Emmanuel
It seems that you would suggest that if we need to retire stdcmd implementation?
if java implementation is available?
-D
On 11/3/05, Emmanuel Venisse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
you must have only one implementation of a provider in classpathEmmanueldan tran said:
> I thought the secon
you must have only one implementation of a provider in classpath
Emmanuel
dan tran said:
> I thought the second token is specific for each provider.
> Currently starteam provider implementation will work with all starteams
> However, with starteam's java implementation, it works with 6.0+.
> s
I thought the second token is specific for each provider.
Currently starteam provider implementation will work with all starteams
However, with starteam's java implementation, it works with 6.0+.
so how would scm manager knows which implementation to pickup?
-Dan
On 11/3/05, Emmanuel V
No, I don't want to use a different url format for an equivalent provider.
So user can choose it's provider implementation without change the scm url
in pom
Emmanuel
dan tran said:
> starteam has java client too. What would the scmurl looks like?
> scm:starteam-java:xyz
> -Dan
>
>
> On 11/3/05,
starteam has java client too. What would the scmurl looks like? scm:starteam-java:xyz
-Dan
On 11/3/05, Emmanuel Venisse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
It's a planned feature but I have no time to do itIt will be interesting to use a java client too for cvs
any volunteers?EmmanuelArnaud HERITIER
It's a planned feature but I have no time to do it
It will be interesting to use a java client too for cvs
any volunteers?
Emmanuel
Arnaud HERITIER said:
> Hi guys,
>
> Can't it be interesting to take a look at this library [1] to use it in
> the
> svn provider instead of the command line ?
> I
