Craig
On Nov 16, 2006, at 6:22 PM, Marc Prud'hommeaux wrote:
Roy-I think people use the ".zip" extensions because that is what most desktop managers will map to the decompression application. Also, recent version of Windows allow exploring of .zip file from within explorer.exe as if they were directory structures.To my knowledge, no OS is smart enough to be able to distinguish between a .jar that is just an archive of files vs. an executable .jar file (where double-clicking indicates that the jar's application should be launched).Of course, the existing .zip assembly file can always be unpacked using the "jar xvf ...zip" command, so no additional software should ever be required to unpack them.On Nov 16, 2006, at 5:49 PM, Roy T. Fielding wrote:On Nov 16, 2006, at 5:22 PM, Marc Prud'hommeaux wrote:BTW, why distribute a zip package? Wouldn't it be more sensible to distribute as a jar? Just curious.The zip contains documentation, examples, and the dependency jars required to run the examples.Yes, I know that -- the point was that the jar format, as in jar cvf mypackage.jar mypackage is a general archive format that uses ZIP compression and can be unpacked by anyone who has installed java. Is there a reason to use a separate packaging format that is specific to winzip? I use gzipped tar for C releases and jar for java releases, but I have also seen a lot of other java projects that distribute botha .zip package and a tar.gz package. I was wondering if you knew why.....Roy--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Craig Russell Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/jdo 408 276-5638 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
