Hi,
I don't care much which of the jars contains the actual class files, as long as we don't break backwards compatibility.
But I would support adding an additional "uno.jar" (or "libreoffice.jar"), which has ridl.jar, unoloader.jar, juh.jar etc on it's classpath.
So that as an extension developer, you would only need to include one jar file (with a name that sounds familiar).
Regards
Samuel
Am 05.02.20 um 22:03 schrieb Rene
Engelhard:
Hi, On Tue, Feb 04, 2020 at 09:04:30PM +0000, Samuel Mehrbrodt (via logerrit) wrote:New commits: commit ae855bf48163ff64d94cfc34aff8e37abdb5518d Author: Samuel Mehrbrodt <Samuel.Mehrbrodt@xxxxxx> AuthorDate: Wed Dec 11 13:23:43 2019 +0100 Commit: Stephan Bergmann <sbergman@xxxxxxxxxx> CommitDate: Tue Feb 4 22:03:54 2020 +0100 tdf#117331 Merge jurt and unoil into ridl jurt.jar and unoil.jar are kept as effectively empty jars, each with a Class-Path: ridl.jar in their meta-inf/manifest.mf, so that 3rd-party code loading them (with or without also loading ridl.jar) will still have access to their content.I believe this should then not be in ridl.jar then. That sounds a bit misleading. How about creating a "uno.jar" or "ure.jar" or something like this instead of reuing ridl.jar? That one then could be referenced with the same method from the "old" jars. (Or vice-versa, merge them into jurt.jar, since "Java Uno Runtime" sounds like a match.) Regards, Rene _______________________________________________ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
_______________________________________________ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
