Re: Red Hat, Sun finally buddy up on Java
"Finally"? Redhat was the only distro with a functional java package
(rather than the binary installer) for a long time. Sun and Redhat
have been playing nicey-nice with each other for ages, relative to the
linux community at large. :)
On Nov 5, 7:41 pm, Ramon F Herrera <ra...@conexus.net> wrote:
On Nov 5, 11:11 pm, Mark Space <marksp...@sbc.global.net> wrote:
Ramon F Herrera wrote:
One can't help but wonder whether the next step is the integration of
NetBeans into Eclipse...
I doubt it. This move is centered on the server space. More likely
you'd see a merger of JBoss and Glassfish, or at least a feature swap.
(But even a merger of those, I don't see as very likely.) I don't see
anything that points at one side giving up their desktop IDE.
Mark & Lew:
Perhaps a solution to keep everyone happy would be for the NetBeans
team to follow on Borland/CodeGear's footsteps? NetGear would be able
to contribute and impart their own kind on magic to an Eclipse base.
Competition is extremely important, and I would be very worried to see
Eclipse swallowing everybody else, the way they did with JBuilder.
The one item in my wish list is that all Java IDE providers:
- Had a common directory and file structure for projects
- Allowed me to easily keep all the *.java files in a separate
directory, accessible by all the IDEs that I use.
*dons asbestos undergarments*
People who voluntarily store critical parts of their source (like GUI
layouts) in such a way that only one tool can possibly build it are
creating their own problem, regardless of language.
*removes asbestos undergarments*
For myself, I've solved both of these issues with Apache Maven, which
is capable of generating projects for several IDEs from a common
codebase and project file. The process for getting a working eclipse
environment for the projects I'm working on right now is:
1. check out.
2. mvn eclipse:eclipse
3. Eclipse/Import/Existing Projects
I found plugins for IDEA and Netbeans project generation, too.
Rather than impose a specific standard source layout on every single
tool[0], we should probably demand simpler, better-documented formats
for project metadata and clearer conceptual mappings between tool-
specific concepts (like Netbeans' "modules") and standard concepts
(like "JAR").
[0] I expect to be burned at the stake by other maven users for
uttering that sentence. :)