Changing the hard coded package names would mean one could no longer use the program with a non-free Swing implementation such as Sun's. This sounds like a non-starter to me.
If SwingSWT were to be repackaged to java.awt and java.swing, this would be possible. Is that possible??? Might warrent talking with the upstream authors. On Wed, 2004-03-10 at 06:48, Arnaud Vandyck wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > Tom Badran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > This seems a really nice way to get an awt/swing implementation that > > already works with gij, has anyone looked at implementing it in > > debian and possibly getting a shed load more packages from > > contrib->main? > > I guess you are talking about SwingWT? > > http://swingwt.sourceforge.net/ > http://sourceforge.net/projects/swingwt > > Seems great, but if we add the project in Debian, it'll change nothing > at the actual situation. > > If we want the swing application to use SwingWT and go to main (if it's > the only reason the application is in contrib!), we'll have to modify > all the javax.swing.* and java.awt.* package to swingwtx.swing.* and > swingwt.awt.*... And we are not sure of the benefice... (everything is > not yet implemented and we cannot be sure if there are no other bugs > than the one from non-free Swing implementation. > > It'd be better if this was better bounded to a free JVM... but i'm not > sure it's a long term benefit? > > Cheers, > > PS: If you want it, see the wnpp bugs and file one (wishlist + subject: > RFP: swingwt -- short description...) > > - -- > .''`. > : :' :rnaud > `. `' > `- > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) > > iD8DBQFATw6b4vzFZu62tMIRAlVpAKCDLkZK/AaNwbKjaCP0HI0DXbNSfACeOYbz > CIeB7sPQDqFMRw51q1Giplk= > =mZ11 > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
