-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Michael Koch wrote:
[...]
| Yeah, basing on GCJ 4.0 and providing native Eclipse by default looks
| like a very goode idea. As this means we need to compile java to
| bytecode/jars first with well get support for non-native runtimes for
| free. I'm will
On Mon, Mar 07, 2005 at 11:57:03AM -0600, Jerry Haltom wrote:
> My goal is to make Eclipse work out of the box perfectly with GCJ 4.0.
> Obviously, the end user (you) can switch or choose whatever VM he wants
> on his own. I am not going to invest my time with making Eclipse run on
> other VMs. Pa
> I. Choosing A Packaging Approach
What's wrong with the current one until upstream release proper source
drops? I would rather build off of a supported upstream drop instead of
CVS checkouts.
>
> ~The SWT libraries and the Eclipse platform itself need to be
> packaged in such a way that app
On Mon, Mar 07, 2005 at 03:30:08AM -0500, Barry Hawkins wrote:
> I. Choosing A Packaging Approach
> ~Part of what makes Eclipse packaging a challenge is that it is not
> one thing. Eclipse as we commonly refer to it in Java contexts consists of:
>
> The Eclipse Platform
> The SWT Libraries
>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Michael Koch wrote:
[...]
| You said in earlier thread on this list that you wanted to setup a
| repository at svn.debian.org.
Michael,
~In a thread[0] on the little-known pkg-eclipse mailing list, Joerg
indicated that setup of an svn repository had
Hi Joerg,
We really need to get the Eclipse packaging group up now. Better sooner
then later.
You said in earlier thread on this list that you wanted to setup a
repository at svn.debian.org. What have to done so far? What other
tasks have you don so far for the Eclipse packaging group ?
Micha
6 matches
Mail list logo
