Hi,
I have seen a lot of problems with dlls and shared libraries and I think a
100% Java solution is the right way (the same is true for the CVS plugin).
Zsolt
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Alexander Kitaev [mailto:alex@tmate.org]
> Sent: Friday, October 15, 2004 9:30 PM
> To: users@subclipse.tigris.org
> Subject: Using pure java svn library instead of javahl?
>
>
> Hello All,
>
> What do you think about making subclipse use pure java svn client library
> instead of javahl?
>
> I'm asking because I'm developing one (library) and it is already
> able to do
> the basic svn operations, both on the working copies and directly on
> repository. It is also possible and not complex at all to make the library
> work with eclipse IResources objects instead of java.io.File to
> access file
> system.
>
> Library development is not finished yet, but I suppose the more users it
> will have the faster it will progress.
>
> I do think that making use of pure java library instead of javahl
> will make
> subclipse better (i.e. portable and may be faster), and probably even will
> allow to implement more interesting features, because the library I'm
> working on provides richer API then javahl bindings.
>
> You may take a look at the library at http://tmate.org/svn/
> I'll be glad to hear your opinions!
>
> Thanks,
> Alexander Kitaev.
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subclipse.tigris.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subclipse.tigris.org
>
>
Received on Sat Oct 16 17:22:24 2004