Skip to main content

source code?

11 replies [Last post]
applebanana8
Offline
Joined: 2004-06-16

Why isn't there a Source code download link on the front page?
Where can I download source code tarballs?

Reply viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
diabeteo
Offline
Joined: 2005-11-08

Looking Glass 3D 1.0 works only on Java 1.6 together with the newest version of Java3D. None of the existing "nonproprietary" versions of Java like GCJ, Kaffe or Harmony implement new functions that are used in LG3D.

Regards,

Stanley

paulby
Offline
Joined: 2003-06-13

If a source tar ball would help we can certainly add that to the mix. Remind in a couple of weeks, after JavaOne and I'll make the changes.

Rgds

Paul

diabeteo
Offline
Joined: 2005-11-08

Source code is available from CVS.

Please refer to this site for instructions on how to get the sources:
https://lg3d.dev.java.net/lg3d-developers-guide.html#Download_the_Projec...

Regards,

Stanley

applebanana8
Offline
Joined: 2004-06-16

Sorry, should have been more specific; where do I download a [b]tarball[/b] of the latest [b]release[/b]?

diabeteo
Offline
Joined: 2005-11-08

Source code is available [b]only[/b] from CVS.
There is no tarball.

Stanley

applebanana8
Offline
Joined: 2004-06-16

Hmm, strange way to run an open source project.

diabeteo
Offline
Joined: 2005-11-08

It's much more convenient. Of course, not everybody know how to use CVS, but there is a built-in support for CVS in major IDE's. For example in NetBeans.
If you would like to have easy access to LG3D source, please read this article:
https://lg3d.dev.java.net/netbeans/NetBeansLookingGlass.html
It will help you with getting code from CVS repository, building and running Project Looking Glass with NetBeans.

Regards,

Stanley

applebanana8
Offline
Joined: 2004-06-16

It is convenient for those who want bleeding edge (some other scm would be better btw). Very inconvenient for people who want releases or might want to upload packages to distributions, inconvenient enough that it isn't worth bothering, considering your attitude.

William Tracy

> It is convenient for those who want bleeding edge

Who else would want LG3D? :-)

> (some other scm would be
> better btw).

It's kind of late to change SCMs now.

> Very inconvenient for people who want releases or might want to upload packages
> to distributions, inconvenient enough that it isn't worth bothering, considering
> your attitude.

The prevailing attitude around here seems to be that there's no reason
to download the source if you're not a developer. I suppose they have
a point that since it's Java, most of it doesn't need to be recompiled
for different platforms.

You make a good point about package creators, though. Maybe someone
will read this and do something about it.

William

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: interest-unsubscribe@lg3d.dev.java.net
For additional commands, e-mail: interest-help@lg3d.dev.java.net

applebanana8
Offline
Joined: 2004-06-16

> Who else would want LG3D? :-)

Heh.

> It's kind of late to change SCMs now.

Why is that? Almost every newer SCM comes with scripts to convert CVS repositories.

> The prevailing attitude around here seems to be that
> there's no reason to download the source if you're not a developer.
> I suppose they have a point that since it's Java, most of it doesn't need
> to be recompiled for different platforms.

What about users who prefer to use free Java -> bytecode compilers? What about people who want to use *alternative* Java -> bytecode compilers? What about if you want to compile the source code with free Java apps like GCJ? Or convert it to native code for speed improvements?? Users may be developers too, but they don't nessecarily want bleeding edge versions or official binaries!

> You make a good point about package creators, though.
> Maybe someone will read this and do something about it.

I look forward to that!

William Tracy

Before this goes any further, I should point out that I am in no way
one of the administrators for the project, and I don't really have the
power to change how LG3D's release system works. I'm just a hacker and
forum monkey. :-)

> Why is that? Almost every newer SCM comes with scripts to convert
> CVS repositories.

Really? My understanding was that they only way to convert a CVS
commit history to Subversion was through a paid service.

If you don't care about the version history, then yes, you can move
over fairly easily.

CVS has been around awhile. People are familiar with CVS. Most IDEs
have built-in support for CVS. CVS sucks, but a lot of people are not
in a big hurry to move away from it.

> What about users who prefer to use free Java -> bytecode compilers? What
> about people who want to use *alternative* Java -> bytecode compilers? What
> about if you want to compile the source code with free Java apps like GCJ?
> Or convert it to native code for speed improvements?? Users may be developers
> too, but they don't nessecarily want bleeding edge versions or official binaries!

LG3D is not compatible with any free compilers, including GCJ.
Compiling to native binaries is not an option. It might work with
another compiler if built against Sun's classpath, but most of the
free compilers aren't completely compatible with Java 5 syntax yet.
(We'll see how this all changes once Sun GPLs its implementation.)

While I'm arguing over technicalities here :-) the X11 integration
*does* use C code that needs to be recompiled for different platforms.

So, yes, your original argument is essentially correct.

However, I'm not actually aware of any end-users who build LG3D
themselves. The coders/hackers build from CVS, the fine folks working
on a Darwin/OS X port seem to build from CVS, and everybody else seems
happy with the pre-built binaries.

William

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: interest-unsubscribe@lg3d.dev.java.net
For additional commands, e-mail: interest-help@lg3d.dev.java.net