No thanks. WOLips is pretty huge and has enhancements for a lot of
features. I for my part wouldn't want to support yet another platform...
Cheers, Anjo
Am 02.05.2006 um 16:16 schrieb JR Ruggentaler:
> M6 works but RC1 and RC2 are flaky.
>
> Has anyone given any taught to supporting Netbeans 5.0+ for WO
> development? I imported a large WO project into NB 5.0 and built it
> using ant + WOProject ant jar. Netbeans seems to have improved
> their module/plugin wizards... If NB is stable it may be a good
> alternative to eclipse.
>
> J.R.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Anjo Krank [mailto:kran..ogicunited.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, May 02, 2006 9:04 AM
> To: woproject-de..bjectstyle.org
> Subject: Re: Eclipse >M5 very flaky
>
>
> Well... I don't know if I should be happy that I'm not just imagining
> things or alarmed because this was also my impression. I'll also try
> RC2 today.
>
> How about our Windows brethren? Does Eclipse/WOLips work ok for you?
>
> Cheers, Anjo
>
> Am 02.05.2006 um 15:47 schrieb Mike Schrag:
>
>> Yes .. I was thinking this just this morning. I can't tell if this
>> is that Eclipse >M5 sucks or Eclipse >M5 is not as compatible with
>> WOLips. It's driving me crazy at the moment. I just downloaded
>> RC2 to see if these problems go away. They have been steadily
>> getting WORSE with each of these milestone releases the past
>> couple. It's making me nervous about the final release of 3.2. I
>> was planning on spending some time today getting back into WOlips
>> world to see if I could troubleshoot.
>>
>> On May 2, 2006, at 9:41 AM, Anjo Krank wrote:
>>
>>> All,
>>>
>>> is it just me or are all Eclipse builds > M5 pretty rough to use?
>>> Breakpoints don't display correctly, copy/paste sometimes doesn't
>>> work, installing WOLips isn't very straightforward anymore etc.
>>>
>>> I wonder how much of this is due to WOLips and how much due to
>>> Eclipse proper and the dependencies. Can we expect a smoother
>>> version once Eclipse 3.2 final ships? Any ideas or estimates?
>>>
>>> Cheers, Anjo
>>>
>>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Tue May 02 2006 - 10:21:19 EDT