> Okay, so have I got this right? The proposal is to have a directory for
> "standard" jars that are auto-included in the classpath for every JVM,
> and a directory for "optional" jars that must be manually specified by
> startup scripts, etc?
Essentially, that's what I'd like to see. However, I
Ben Burton wrote:
Okay, so have I got this right? The proposal is to have a directory for
"standard" jars that are auto-included in the classpath for every JVM,
Yes, though how this is done is to be determined. For example some JVMs
might not have an "extensions" directory, or if they do it has t
Okay, so have I got this right? The proposal is to have a directory for
"standard" jars that are auto-included in the classpath for every JVM,
and a directory for "optional" jars that must be manually specified by
startup scripts, etc?
Ben.
> Okay, so have I got this right? The proposal is to have a directory for
> "standard" jars that are auto-included in the classpath for every JVM,
> and a directory for "optional" jars that must be manually specified by
> startup scripts, etc?
Essentially, that's what I'd like to see. However, I
Ben Burton wrote:
>Okay, so have I got this right? The proposal is to have a directory for
>"standard" jars that are auto-included in the classpath for every JVM,
>
Yes, though how this is done is to be determined. For example some JVMs
might not have an "extensions" directory, or if they do it
Okay, so have I got this right? The proposal is to have a directory for
"standard" jars that are auto-included in the classpath for every JVM,
and a directory for "optional" jars that must be manually specified by
startup scripts, etc?
Ben.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with
6 matches
Mail list logo
