Any luck yet?
Scot P. Floess wrote:
OK...so can you elaborate a little more? Is the source all in one
tree? Separate trees? Or what?
Dimitris Mouchritsas wrote:
No, it's worse. It's package cyclic dependencies. Someone thought
that it
was a good idea, instead of making a business.util pack
OK...so can you elaborate a little more? Is the source all in one
tree? Separate trees? Or what?
Dimitris Mouchritsas wrote:
No, it's worse. It's package cyclic dependencies. Someone thought that it
was a good idea, instead of making a business.util package (in business we
put our ejb's) to
No, it's worse. It's package cyclic dependencies. Someone thought that it
was a good idea, instead of making a business.util package (in business we
put our ejb's) to put all utilities in a util package.
On Dec 21, 2007 3:22 PM, Scot P. Floess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So, the source is cyclic
So, the source is cyclic? Does the source exist such that everything
has something like this:
src/com/Foo.java (uses Bar.java)
src/com/Bar.java (uses Foo.java)
Or something different?
If so, just define you sourcepath for javac to include src
If not, can you further elaborate?
Dimitris Mouc
Hi everyone. I'm into a project that started recently. The "powers that be"
wanted the dev team to re-use another project which supposedly is similar to
ours. The problem is that this project is also based on a "base" project of
the company. I forgot to mention I'm talking about a J2EE 1.3 project,
