[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
|
RE: [linux-distros-dev] PHPeclipse 1.1.8 rpm
|
Ben you wrote:
> I'm not sure that's a good idea because I didn't make the patches with
> the intention of them working with non-linux systems. Specifically, I
> just blindly removed the win32 help stuff and the XAMPP
> stuff. IMO it's
> not worth the effort to make these patches work with linux
> and non-linux
> systems.
IMHO, it would be a little work and actually a good thing in several
ways:
- for phpeclipse, making sure the plugins are linux friendly
- but more than that, for this project, come with a set of simple
guidelines that can help plugin developers everywhere create consistenly
linux friendly code.
In the case of the win32help, it can be as simple as extracting win32
related extensions in a fragment with platform filters that would only
make it activate on win32.
Would not that fir well here?
--
Cheers
Philippe
philippe ombredanne | 1 650 799 0949 | pombredanne at nexb.com
nexB - Open by Design (tm) - http://www.nexb.com
http://easyeclipse.org - irc://irc.freenode.net/easyeclipse
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ben Konrath [mailto:bkonrath@xxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Monday, August 14, 2006 9:52 AM
> To: Philippe Ombredanne
> Cc: linux-distros-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: [linux-distros-dev] PHPeclipse 1.1.8 rpm
>
>
> On Mon, 2006-08-14 at 08:09 -0700, Philippe Ombredanne wrote:
> > Ben:
> > Very nice!
> >
> > >* a patch to make it work with Eclipse 3.2
> >
> > Do you mind if I apply it to the phpeclipse CVS tree?
> > I was planning to work on that :-P
>
> Actually, I got the patch from CVS HEAD :)
>
> > I assume you worked from HEAD, since there was an oversight
> of tagging
> > the 1.1.8 version... I'll do it before patching.
>
> No, the source tarball is as close as I could get to 1.1.8. There's a
> script in the srpm that makes the source tarball from a combination of
> CVS on the date that 1.1.8 was released, the src zips in the source
> release and the non-binary parts of the binary release (e.g.
> feature.xml, plugin.xml, etc).
>
> > I may be able to get something for the two linux patches too, so you
> > would not have to maintain them.
>
>
> Cheers, Ben
>
