On 05.02.2017 01:32, Stefan Steiniger wrote: > Hey, > > well, the decision to split was rather practical as Jump was still under > development at the time of the first OJ versions. So this way we would know
ahh, i remember. those were the days ;).. seems like you maintain OJ since ages already ;) > whats new from our side, not even forgetting that we included stuff from > others > too with their proper package path (or i did at least) ;) > > And yes putting things back together also seems difficult if OJ 1.x should > not > loose backward compatibility in particular for external plugins - if this its > worth, you have decide looking forward. agreed, i therefor propose to - keep existing class locations (backward compatibility) - add new classes to matching packages, if they already exist, else the author is free to choose/create a package while we are at it, i just want to mention code formatting again. what i use and i remember us negotiating this as standard formatting in the past is - spaces only, not tabs - indention is 2 spaces reformatting should only be done when - classes are modified anyway - classes contain mixed tab/spaces janitorially ..ede ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot _______________________________________________ Jump-pilot-devel mailing list Jump-pilot-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jump-pilot-devel
