On Tue, 9 Nov 1999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > I think that the current build system for the java version of Xercies is > totally BROKEN. One thing that is a must do is for us to do it over. > I would like to see a system that doesn't require a download of > cygwin for windows people. We want people on Windows > and UNIX to be able to build the system, without relying on > multi megabyte downloads over a modem. The current system > clearly fails that criteria. > > Stefano pointed out the existance of a Make tool implemented in > Java, which would be more than fine with me. I don't know how big the > download for this is, but it's worth investigating. As far as jar files > go, that would be fine with me as well.
Another option would be to stick to pure 'make'. As in a subset of 'gmake' :-). Dw > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Keith Visco <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Monday, November 08, 1999 6:03 PM > Subject: Re: version numbers > > > > > > > > Stefano Mazzocchi wrote: > > > > > Scott Boag/CAM/Lotus wrote: > > > > > > > > What are we doing about version numbering? > > > > > > > > Right now I would like to make the xalan tarball: xalan_0.19.0.tar.gz > > > > > > Can we agree on using jar files for Java stuff only? This is why people > > > are used to have jar tools if they deal with java and we just have to > > > build a single package. > > > > > > > +1 > > > > > > > > Should each subproject go on its own? > > > > > > > We can make it 1.0.0 when the release is deemed to have reasonably > stable > > > > APIs (I expect the APIs for xalan to be evolved over the next couple > of > > > > months). Any objections? > > > > > > > > Is it required to have seperate bin and source tars? It would be > easier > > > > for us right now to have a single tar & zip. > > > > > > I usually do one just big jar with all the javadocs and binaries so that > > > users don't have to figure out what to do. (we have tons of win32 users > > > that won't download 20Mb of cygnus just to have GNU make) > > > > I'm not a big Make person, I know enough to get by, so I apologize in > advance > > for my Make illiteracy. Can you make your make files compatible with > Symantec > > make? > > I think most people have some sort of make on their system. I have both > Cygnus > > (GNU) and Symantec make. I will admit though I did not download Cygnus to > use > > Make with Java, I use it for C++. Since I use Visual Cafe, I simply import > all > > .java files and build. Nice and easy. > > > > > By using Jakarta Ant we should remove that need, but we'll see. > > > > I took a look at this, looks pretty verbose to me, but I haven't tried it > yet. > > > > --Keith > > > > > >
