[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Has anyone looked at swingswt?



Changing the hard coded package names would mean one could no longer use
the program with a non-free Swing implementation such as Sun's. This
sounds like a non-starter to me.

If SwingSWT were to be repackaged to java.awt and java.swing, this would
be possible. Is that possible??? Might warrent talking with the upstream
authors.

On Wed, 2004-03-10 at 06:48, Arnaud Vandyck wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> Tom Badran <tb100@doc.ic.ac.uk> writes:
> 
> > This seems a really nice way to get an awt/swing implementation that
> > already  works with gij, has anyone looked at implementing it in
> > debian and possibly  getting a shed load more packages from
> > contrib->main?
> 
> I guess you are talking about SwingWT?
> 
> http://swingwt.sourceforge.net/
> http://sourceforge.net/projects/swingwt
> 
> Seems great, but if we add the project in Debian, it'll change nothing
> at the actual situation.
> 
> If we want the swing application to use SwingWT and go to main (if it's
> the only reason the application is in contrib!), we'll have to modify
> all the javax.swing.* and java.awt.* package to swingwtx.swing.* and
> swingwt.awt.*... And we are not sure of the benefice... (everything is
> not yet implemented and we cannot be sure if there are no other bugs
> than the one from non-free Swing implementation.
> 
> It'd be better if this was better bounded to a free JVM... but i'm not
> sure it's a long term benefit?
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> PS: If you want it, see the wnpp bugs and file one (wishlist + subject:
>     RFP: swingwt -- short description...)
> 
> - -- 
>   .''`. 
>  : :' :rnaud
>  `. `'  
>    `-    
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)
> 
> iD8DBQFATw6b4vzFZu62tMIRAlVpAKCDLkZK/AaNwbKjaCP0HI0DXbNSfACeOYbz
> CIeB7sPQDqFMRw51q1Giplk=
> =mZ11
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> 



Reply to: