Re: Problems with new semantic package
Hi Ville,
Sorry for replying so late, your message got lost in a ton of others.
On 8/6/02 2:01 PM, "Ville Skyttä" <ville.skytta(a)xemacs.org> wrote:
On Tue, 2002-08-06 at 23:48, Andy Piper wrote:
>> Okay, that's a valid reason. What about the speedbar upgrade, do you
>> know if it introduces incompatibilities? prog-modes, xslt-process and
>> vhdl require it (in addition, xslt-process requires eieio, semantic and
>> jde).
>
> Hmmn, I see. I guess we could hope that they are backwardsly compatible but
> who knows. I can test speedbar with other things, I've no idea how to test
> xslt stuff.
Ovidiu, we're talking about possibly upgrading jde, eieio, speedbar and
semantic to their latest versions in XEmacs. Do you know if
xslt-process will work with them?
I think with 2.1 I already use the latest eieio, speedbar and semantic, but
I'll make sure it does work.
Oh, and we still have xslt-process 1.2.1. Wouldn't it make sense
to
upgrade it to a newer version, I see 2.1 is the current one. Of course,
2.1 would have to be stripped down quite a bit, 6MB+ gzipped is IMHO a
bit much for a single XEmacs package... :)
The size of the package also made me stay away from upgrading the Xemacs
version:) Steve suggested I could have a minimal package and then allow
users to download the rest of the bits on demand.
I was thinking what would be the best way to do this, to avoid security
issues as well. Is there an Xemacs way to cryptographically sign files,
which is independent on external packages like gpg or pgp? Or should I rely
instead on Java security?
Regards,
--
Ovidiu Predescu <ovidiu(a)apache.org>
http://www.webweavertech.com/ovidiu/weblog/index.html (Weblog)
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Monitor/7464/ (Apache, GNU, Emacs...)