From: Godmar Back (gback@cs.utah.edu)
Date: Sat Dec 12 1998 - 12:02:47 EST
>
> What do you think of maintaining the .class files in the CVS tree,
> instead of the whole Klasses.jar? It would be quite easy to always
> build Klasses.jar locally, from the class files, using either `zip' or
> some simplified jar program we could use as a fallback, for example,
> Andrea Poltronieri's JZip, that's free for non-commercial use
> <URL:http://arena.sci.univr.it/~poltro/jzip/>, or Green Bay, that is
> completely free and includes source code
> <URL:http://www.telepath.com/pandeng/greenbay.html> or even something
> we might code ourselves, it shouldn't be hard to do in Java.
>
> This would save us a lot of disk space and network traffic.
>
How so?
Because downloading uncompressed class files is faster and takes less
space than downloading a jar file?
The main purpose of having it in the CVS is so that people can download it.
We occassionally update it, but the real plan was to have it automatically
updated at Tim's site.
I don't want to .class files in the CVS tree. Besides, they're in the
build tree. That would make things even more confusing.
I even half agree with Archie's earlier wish to remove from there, but
we got feedback from the mailing list that they wanted to have it there.
The way it's right now is already a bit confusing, but it's tolerable:
I cd in obj/libraries/javalib, type make classes build-classes install-classes
which installs the Klasses.jar in my source tree, and then the next
make install will put it in place.
- Godmar
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Sep 23 2000 - 19:57:13 EDT