Thread: [Kernow] Saxon 9?
Brought to you by:
ajwelch
From: Florent G. <li...@fg...> - 2007-11-04 18:37:31
|
Hi Andrew, Mike released Saxon 9 today. I have used it with Kernow. There were only a few trivial things to change, in addition to the change described in the Saxon's ML archives at: http://sf.net/mailarchive/forum.php?thread_name=814097.75783.qm%40web23001.mail.ird.yahoo.com&forum_name=saxon-help If you plan the next Kernow's release to use Saxon 9, that would be worth I commit my changes to the repository. What do you think? Regards, --drkm _____________________________________________________________________________ Ne gardez plus qu'une seule adresse mail ! Copiez vos mails vers Yahoo! Mail |
From: Andrew W. <and...@gm...> - 2007-11-05 09:43:37
|
On 04/11/2007, Florent Georges <li...@fg...> wrote: > Hi Andrew, > > Mike released Saxon 9 today. I have used it with Kernow. > There were only a few trivial things to change, in addition > to the change described in the Saxon's ML archives at: > > http://sf.net/mailarchive/forum.php?thread_name=814097.75783.qm%40web23001.mail.ird.yahoo.com&forum_name=saxon-help > > If you plan the next Kernow's release to use Saxon 9, that > would be worth I commit my changes to the repository. What > do you think? It sounds like it might be best to wait for 9.0.0.2, otherwise the next version of Kernow will only work with 9.0.0.1.... what do you think? |
From: Florent G. <li...@fg...> - 2007-11-05 10:46:01
|
Andrew Welch wrote: Hi > It sounds like it might be best to wait for 9.0.0.2, > otherwise the next version of Kernow will only work with > 9.0.0.1.... what do you think? Actually I think this is the opposite :-) The actual workaround will work with both 9.0.0.1 and 9.0.0.2, but if we use the patch in 9.0.0.2 (the new iterateNamedTemplates()) it will work only with 9.0.0.2. But I think it can be perfectly honest to support only 9.0.0.2 if it is released soon (I guess it will be, as always with first bug-fix release following a major revision). Finally, I think it could be worth using Saxon 9 in the trunk before releasing this use, to get a chance to find possible bugs as soon as possible. Even if we choose to not release before the 9.0.0.2 is out (and so use the new method at this time). Any thought? --drkm _____________________________________________________________________________ Ne gardez plus qu'une seule adresse mail ! Copiez vos mails vers Yahoo! Mail |
From: Andrew W. <and...@gm...> - 2007-11-05 10:56:00
|
On 05/11/2007, Florent Georges <li...@fg...> wrote: > Andrew Welch wrote: > > Hi > > > It sounds like it might be best to wait for 9.0.0.2, > > otherwise the next version of Kernow will only work with > > 9.0.0.1.... what do you think? > > Actually I think this is the opposite :-) The actual > workaround will work with both 9.0.0.1 and 9.0.0.2, but if > we use the patch in 9.0.0.2 (the new iterateNamedTemplates()) > it will work only with 9.0.0.2. ahh ok... > Finally, I think it could be worth using Saxon 9 in the > trunk before releasing this use, to get a chance to find > possible bugs as soon as possible. Even if we choose to not > release before the 9.0.0.2 is out (and so use the new method > at this time). Yeah sure. I was thinking maybe we should create a lib folder alongside src and put all of the dependant jars in there, so you have everything that's needed when you do a fresh checkout. If you agree - can you do it? (Im away from my home machine and would have to re-download them all...) It's annoying at the moment when you check out kernow onto a new machine and then have to hunt down exist.jar ant.jar bounce.jar etc.... |
From: Florent G. <li...@fg...> - 2007-11-05 13:04:05
|
Andrew Welch wrote: > On 05/11/2007, Florent Georges wrote: > > Finally, I think it could be worth using Saxon 9 in > > the trunk before releasing this use, to get a chance to > > find possible bugs as soon as possible. Even if we > > choose to not release before the 9.0.0.2 is out (and so > > use the new method at this time). > Yeah sure. Ok. > I was thinking maybe we should create a lib folder > alongside src and put all of the dependant jars in there, > so you have everything that's needed when you do a fresh > checkout. If you agree - can you do it? (Im away from my > home machine and would have to re-download them all...) > It's annoying at the moment when you check out kernow onto > a new machine and then have to hunt down exist.jar ant.jar > bounce.jar etc.... Maybe. That would remove the need to reference the same library names. Actually, nbproject/project.properties already references such a directory: file.reference.exist.jar=lib/exist.jar file.reference.xmldb.jar=lib/xmldb.jar But those JAR files are not commited. What I wonder is how to handle versionning. Should we have JAR files as: saxon9.jar saxon9-s9api.jar saxon9-xqj.jar ... or rather: saxon9-9.0.0.1.jar saxon9-s9api-9.0.0.1.jar saxon9-xqj-9.0.0.1.jar ... or: saxon/9.0.0.1/saxon9.jar saxon/9.0.0.1/saxon9-s9api.jar saxon/9.0.0.1/saxon9-xqj.jar ... Regarding the SVN repository history, I think there is no big difference, because they are binary files so the whole files will be kept in the history anyway. Maybe the last one is the more clean/clear. The original file names are untouched, but the version is clearer indicated. If you agree, I will commit the changes to run with Saxon 9, then refactor dependencies to use the lib/ directory and add the required (and only the required) libraries, within versionned directories (3rd solution above). Are you ok with that? Regards, --drkm _____________________________________________________________________________ Ne gardez plus qu'une seule adresse mail ! Copiez vos mails vers Yahoo! Mail _____________________________________________________________________________ Ne gardez plus qu'une seule adresse mail ! Copiez vos mails vers Yahoo! Mail |
From: Andrew W. <and...@gm...> - 2007-11-05 13:11:01
|
On 05/11/2007, Florent Georges <li...@fg...> wrote: > > I was thinking maybe we should create a lib folder > > alongside src and put all of the dependant jars in there, > > so you have everything that's needed when you do a fresh > > checkout. If you agree - can you do it? (Im away from my > > home machine and would have to re-download them all...) > > It's annoying at the moment when you check out kernow onto > > a new machine and then have to hunt down exist.jar ant.jar > > bounce.jar etc.... > > Maybe. That would remove the need to reference the same > library names. Actually, nbproject/project.properties > already references such a directory: > > file.reference.exist.jar=lib/exist.jar > file.reference.xmldb.jar=lib/xmldb.jar I was going to do that a while back but never actually committed the jars (but must've committen the project.properties).... I think we'll still need to use libraries because the source and javadoc pointers? As in, we can't just add the jars. > But those JAR files are not commited. What I wonder is > how to handle versionning. Should we have JAR files as: > > saxon9.jar > saxon9-s9api.jar > saxon9-xqj.jar > ... > > or rather: > > saxon9-9.0.0.1.jar > saxon9-s9api-9.0.0.1.jar > saxon9-xqj-9.0.0.1.jar > ... > > or: > > saxon/9.0.0.1/saxon9.jar > saxon/9.0.0.1/saxon9-s9api.jar > saxon/9.0.0.1/saxon9-xqj.jar > ... > > Regarding the SVN repository history, I think there is no > big difference, because they are binary files so the whole > files will be kept in the history anyway. > > Maybe the last one is the more clean/clear. The original > file names are untouched, but the version is clearer > indicated. > > If you agree, I will commit the changes to run with Saxon > 9, then refactor dependencies to use the lib/ directory and > add the required (and only the required) libraries, within > versionned directories (3rd solution above). yeah sounds great - thanks Florent. |
From: Florent G. <li...@fg...> - 2007-11-05 23:28:35
|
Andrew Welch wrote: > On 05/11/2007, Florent Georges wrote: > > If you agree, I will commit the changes to run with Saxon > > 9, then refactor dependencies to use the lib/ directory and > > add the required (and only the required) libraries, within > > versionned directories (3rd solution above). > yeah sounds great - thanks Florent. I have just commited the changes. Could you please try it out, to ensure everything is ok? BTW, is there anyone else following this list? Regards, --drkm _____________________________________________________________________________ Ne gardez plus qu'une seule adresse mail ! Copiez vos mails vers Yahoo! Mail |
From: <mm...@ca...> - 2007-11-06 08:25:19
|
Am 06.11.2007 um 00:28 schrieb Florent Georges: > > I have just commited the changes. Could you please try it out, to > ensure everything is ok? BTW, is there anyone else following this > list? Me :-) I have no idea about Java programming, but I am interested in the =20 tool and recommend it to users of Saxon who do not use OxygenXML as =20 their XML editor. [Since I changed to an Intel Mac with Mac OS and =20 Win XP on one box I am currently evaluating Oxygen, which allows =20 usage on both platforms with a single license. So far I am quite =20 fine, although I had to increase the memory allocation to 1024M to be =20= able to open and edit an 20M XML file -- but that shouldn't be a =20 problem with 4G of RAM...] Keep it going! - Michael -- _______________________________________________________________ Michael M=FCller-Hillebrand: Dokumentations-Technologien Adobe Certified Expert, FrameMaker L=F6sungen und Training, FrameScript, XML/XSL, Unicode http://cap-studio.de/ -- Tel. +49 (9131) 28747 |
From: Andrew W. <and...@gm...> - 2007-11-06 10:53:03
|
On 05/11/2007, Florent Georges <li...@fg...> wrote: > I have just commited the changes. Could you please try it out, to > ensure everything is ok? BTW, is there anyone else following this > list? I've just checked it and its fine - thanks. There was one small tweak to BrowserLauncher to get rid of a compiler warning. Also I'm not sure how to manage the libraries - we need to use libraries to attach source and javadoc to the dependencies... but I don't think we should include source and doc files in the lib folder (and under version control). If we mananage our own libraries then we'll have the problem over overwriting each others settings during sync, and if we don't commit the properties files then we have the problem of missing out on some settings! I don't know what the answer is... maybe the libraries should be under version control? Oh and it seems there are a grand total of 6 individuals subscribed to this list :) -- Andrew Welch http://andrewjwelch.com Kernow: http://kernowforsaxon.sf.net/ |
From: Florent G. <li...@fg...> - 2007-11-22 13:44:38
|
Andrew Welch wrote: > Also I'm not sure how to manage the libraries I must admit I am not sure too. I ask two NB lists (dev & users) and the answer is that it is not possible to link sources or javadoc to plain JAR files, only to libraries. The workaround is to create a library that uses the same JAR files, and attach sources and javadoc to that library. I've tested it and it works. I think this is the better we can achieve: 1/ the actual JAR files are shared; this is the most important, this is the actual code; if someone change a dependency, the library will be updated for everyone; 2/ there is a risk that one forgots to update its library definition, but in this case he just won't longer be able to retrive the source or javadoc. This risk is better for only those items than for JAR files. So to sum up, the JAR files within the repository. Every change will be automatically updated when 'svn update'. If one want to link source or javadoc, he'll have to create a library around the JAR and add source and javadoc there. What do you think? PS: For Saxon, you have to generate the Javadoc yourself, because NB want some index files that the distributed Saxon's javadoc doesn't have. I reported the 'bug' to Mike, but it is not fixed (yet?). http://www.netbeans.org/servlets/ReadMsg?list=nbusers&msgNo=103449 http://openide.netbeans.org/servlets/ReadMsg?list=dev&msgNo=31215 http://www.netbeans.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=70497 http://www.netbeans.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=44035 Regards, --drkm _____________________________________________________________________________ Ne gardez plus qu'une seule adresse mail ! Copiez vos mails vers Yahoo! Mail |
From: Andrew W. <and...@gm...> - 2007-11-22 13:55:45
|
On 22/11/2007, Florent Georges <li...@fg...> wrote: > So to sum up, the JAR files within the repository. Every change will > be automatically updated when 'svn update'. If one want to link source > or javadoc, he'll have to create a library around the JAR and add > source and javadoc there. > > What do you think? hmm I guess so. It's better than not having the jars checked in at all... Do you think Maven would help here? (I know very little about maven) > PS: For Saxon, you have to generate the Javadoc yourself, because NB > want some index files that the distributed Saxon's javadoc doesn't > have. I reported the 'bug' to Mike, but it is not fixed (yet?). Me too :) http://www.nabble.com/index-all.html-not-present-in-%22additional-resources%22-download-t4102440.html I just copy in index-all from a previous release each time. -- Andrew Welch http://andrewjwelch.com Kernow: http://kernowforsaxon.sf.net/ |