You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to batik-users@xmlgraphics.apache.org by Jens von Pilgrim <j....@4flow.de> on 2001/11/23 12:29:08 UTC
package versions
Hello,
I've got some trouble with lots of different package versions...
Batik (1.1rc4) uses (as far as I can see) the following libraries:
- js.jar
- crimson-parser.jar
Unfortunately these jars don't contain a manifest with package version
infos, so I don't know which version batik uses. Since I probably need
crimson-parser twice (another library needs it too) I will get
problems with different versions maybe.
What versions are used in batik 1.1rc4?
And, addressed to the developers, it it possible to add version infos in
batik's manifest file (using package version identification)? And,
perhaps,
is it possible to rename in future releases of batik the required 3rd
party libraries including their version, like batik-1.1.jar or something
like this? A wonderful solution would be if all xml.apache projects
would include a package version identification...
Jens
____________________________________________________________
Jens von Pilgrim
4flow AG
Berlin, Germany
Re: package versions
Posted by Christophe Jolif <cj...@ilog.fr>.
Jens,
The js.jar is Rhino1.5R2. I let others answer for crimson and to the
generic question on package naming.
> Jens von Pilgrim wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> I've got some trouble with lots of different package versions...
> Batik (1.1rc4) uses (as far as I can see) the following libraries:
>
> - js.jar
> - crimson-parser.jar
>
> Unfortunately these jars don't contain a manifest with package version
>
> infos, so I don't know which version batik uses. Since I probably need
>
> crimson-parser twice (another library needs it too) I will get
> problems with different versions maybe.
>
> What versions are used in batik 1.1rc4?
>
> And, addressed to the developers, it it possible to add version infos
> in
> batik's manifest file (using package version identification)? And,
> perhaps,
> is it possible to rename in future releases of batik the required 3rd
> party libraries including their version, like batik-1.1.jar or
> something like this? A wonderful solution would be if all xml.apache
> projects would include a package version identification...
>
> Jens
> ____________________________________________________________
> Jens von Pilgrim
> 4flow AG
> Berlin, Germany
--
Christophe
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: batik-users-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: batik-users-help@xml.apache.org
Re: package versions
Posted by Stephane Hillion <sh...@ilog.fr>.
On Friday 23 November 2001 13:14, Vincent Hardy wrote:
> You are asking for the js or crimson version in the project they
> come from, right?
>
> js.jar is Rhino15R2
> I think Stephane will be able to tell you which version of Crimson we
> are using.
>
We are using 1.1.2beta2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: batik-users-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: batik-users-help@xml.apache.org
Re: package versions
Posted by Vincent Hardy <vi...@sun.com>.
Jens,
> Jens von Pilgrim wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> I've got some trouble with lots of different package versions...
> Batik (1.1rc4) uses (as far as I can see) the following libraries:
>
> - js.jar
> - crimson-parser.jar
>
> Unfortunately these jars don't contain a manifest with package version
>
> infos, so I don't know which version batik uses. Since I probably need
>
> crimson-parser twice (another library needs it too) I will get
> problems with different versions maybe.
>
> What versions are used in batik 1.1rc4?
You are asking for the js or crimson version in the project they
come from, right?
js.jar is Rhino15R2
I think Stephane will be able to tell you which version of Crimson we
are
using.
>
> And, addressed to the developers, it it possible to add version infos
> in
> batik's manifest file (using package version identification)?
> And,
> perhaps,
> is it possible to rename in future releases of batik the required 3rd
> party libraries including their version, like batik-1.1.jar or
> something like this? A wonderful solution would be if all xml.apache
> projects would include a package version identification...
Point well taken for the manifest: I have added an RFE for that
(Bug #5044). About the jar, I am not sure. This said, we do that for
ant (we use ant_1_4_1.jar). This has value, but one drawback is that
you need to update your scripts/batch files every time a new version
comes up. Anybody has comments, ideas on this?
Thanks for your feedback.
Cheers,
Vincent.
>
> Jens
> ____________________________________________________________
> Jens von Pilgrim
> 4flow AG
> Berlin, Germany
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: batik-users-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: batik-users-help@xml.apache.org