NetRexx packaging

[dIon Gillard-3]

Can I make a suggestion regarding the packaging of NetRexx for Java 1.1 (and
above)?

I'd like to see it packaged as a JAR file. No Zip, no tar.z etc. If people have
1.1 then they have JAR. Jar is also binary compatible with zip and handles long
filenames.

Benefits:
        * Platform independent
        * Easier for Mike to build (only one format)
        * A standard format
        * Runtime, Compiler and distribution all share same format

Comments?

I'd also like the runtime and compiler zip files to have version numbers in the
file name:

        nrx1120R
        nrx1120C

etc....
dIon, Multitask Consulting
Work: http://www.multitask.com.au
NetRexx: http://www.multitask.com.au/netrexx
RxExtras: http://www.multitask.com.au/rxextras

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
To unsubscribe from this mailing list ( ibm-netrexx ), please send a note to
[hidden email]
with the following message in the body of the note
unsubscribe ibm-netrexx <e-mail address>

[Massimiliano Marsiglietti]

Ciao,

In <[hidden email]>, on 10/07/97
   at 11:29 AM, "dIon Gillard" <[hidden email]> said:

>Can I make a suggestion regarding the packaging of NetRexx for Java 1.1
>(and above)?

>I'd like to see it packaged as a JAR file. No Zip, no tar.z etc. If
>people have 1.1 then they have JAR. Jar is also binary compatible with
>zip and handles long filenames.

[..]

>Comments?

Well, handling .jar files can be tricky.. It doesn't have all the options
your usual zip manager has.. I could understand if you said  NetRexxR.zip
(which already is a jar file in disguise, AFAIK), but the whole archive?
Everyone has his favourite zip managers
(well, at least me :-)), I think, should we really re-configure them to
handle .jar files?

Oh, and the freeware InfoZip's Unzip is present on more platforms than
Java 1.1. :-)

(Maybe /adding/ the .jar packaging?)

>I'd also like the runtime and compiler zip files to have version numbers
>in the file name:

> nrx1120R
> nrx1120C

Now this is interesting.. But, since there have been only *a few* NetRexx
releases that weren't forward compatible, why not change name only in
those releases (eg NetRexxR102.zip, NetRexxR11.zip)?

[I said the above things, but I already know what Mike will say about
runtimes :-)]

--
max

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
To unsubscribe from this mailing list ( ibm-netrexx ), please send a note to
[hidden email]
with the following message in the body of the note
unsubscribe ibm-netrexx <e-mail address>

[mcbrides]

>Can I make a suggestion regarding the packaging of NetRexx for Java 1.1 (and
>above)?
>
>I'd like to see it packaged as a JAR file. No Zip, no tar.z etc. If people have
>1.1 then they have JAR. Jar is also binary compatible with zip and handles long
>filenames.
>
>Benefits:
>       * Platform independent
>       * Easier for Mike to build (only one format)
>       * A standard format
>       * Runtime, Compiler and distribution all share same format
>
>Comments?
>
>I'd also like the runtime and compiler zip files to have version numbers in the
>file name:
>
>       nrx1120R
>       nrx1120C
>

I cast my support for Dion's recommendation on the sole merit of platform
independancy. It'd be a breath of fresh air. Something that Sun should be doing
with their works, like HOTJAVA and JAVAWORKSHOP which are delivered in a win95
selfextracting archive or tar...

Versioning of archives would make it easier to keep track of things. Hmmm...
how about it, Mike?

--

/-------------------------------------\
| Jerry McBride  ([hidden email]) |
\-------------------------------------/

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
To unsubscribe from this mailing list ( ibm-netrexx ), please send a note to
[hidden email]
with the following message in the body of the note
unsubscribe ibm-netrexx <e-mail address>

[dIon Gillard-3]

On Tue, 07 Oct 97 09:24:00 +0100, [hidden email] wrote:

>Well, handling .jar files can be tricky.. It doesn't have all the options
>your usual zip manager has.. I could understand if you said  NetRexxR.zip
>(which already is a jar file in disguise, AFAIK), but the whole archive?
>Everyone has his favourite zip managers
>(well, at least me :-)), I think, should we really re-configure them to
>handle .jar files?
You can use a JAR file in any of your favourite ZIP managers - they're the same
format.

>Oh, and the freeware InfoZip's Unzip is present on more platforms than
>Java 1.1. :-)
Yes....but everyone downloading 1.120 of Netrexx will have java 1.1. They may
not necessarily have infozip....

>>I'd also like the runtime and compiler zip files to have version numbers
>>in the file name:
>
>> nrx1120R
>> nrx1120C
>
>Now this is interesting.. But, since there have been only *a few* NetRexx
>releases that weren't forward compatible, why not change name only in
>those releases (eg NetRexxR102.zip, NetRexxR11.zip)?
Hmm.....that sounds ok...


dIon, Multitask Consulting
Work: http://www.multitask.com.au
NetRexx: http://www.multitask.com.au/netrexx
RxExtras: http://www.multitask.com.au/rxextras

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
To unsubscribe from this mailing list ( ibm-netrexx ), please send a note to
[hidden email]
with the following message in the body of the note
unsubscribe ibm-netrexx <e-mail address>