[daisy] Sketch Editor JHotDraw

[Michael Hänni]

Hi Karel

For the current state the sizes differ only a little:

"full-jar":
ergon-SketchApplet.jar = 107kB
jhotdraw-7.1.jar            = 719kB
TOTAL                        = 826kB

"only-what-we-need-jar":
ergon-SketchApplet.jar = 619kB


So I would suggest the "full-jar" solution.
(jhotdraw-7.1.jar is the same as ./Draw/JHotDraw Draw.jar)

Regards,
Michael

Karel Vervaeke schrieb:
> On Mon, 2008-06-16 at 10:10 +0200, Michael Hänni wrote:
>   
>> On Friday I wrote to Werner Randelshofer from JHotDraw again to find a 
>> satisfying solution.
>>
>> Here is a extract from his reply:
>>
>> "Don't get me wrong. I don't mind at all, if the Daisy people want a 
>> separate .jar file which contains all class files of JHotDraw. And I am 
>> willing to deploy this .jar file with each release of JHotDraw.
>>
>> I am just saying, that this is not the optimal solution for an applet. 
>>
>> Please take a look at AnyWikiDraw. In this project, the source code of 
>> JHotDraw resides in a directory of its own - its not intermingling with 
>> source code of AnyWikiDraw. We use javac to automatically create a very 
>> small applet, which contains the compiled code of AnyWikiDraw and only 
>> those classes of JHotDraw, which are referenced by AnyWikiDraw.We never 
>> do changes in the source code of JHotDraw in the AnyWikiDraw project. If 
>> we want to upgrade to a newer version of JHotDraw, we just replace the 
>> whole directory of JHotDraw with a newer version and then run javac again."
>>
>> So he would also agree to the solution with a separate .jar file and 
>> deploy such a .jar file with each release.
>> The other alternative he is suggesting seams mainly for performance gain 
>> reasons.
>>
>> Can you live with any of these two solutions?
>>     
>
> I can live with both of these solutions (phew), but I think we should
> evaluate the performance impact of the full-jar solution:
>
> * impact on download time: Depends on the difference in size between the
> full-jar and the only-what-we-need-jar.  If the difference is small, the
> full-jar option should chosen.  If the difference is significant we
> should still evaluate if applet caching works as advertised [0] if it
> works, I still prefer the full-jar.
>
> [0]
> http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.4.2/docs/guide/plugin/developer_guide/applet_caching.html#option
>
> * impact on JVM startup time: I'm confident that the impact is not large
> enough to be noticed.
>
> If we decide to go for an only-what-we-need-jar I would make downloading
> the source code a part of the build procedure and keep a copy of the
> source code at cocoondev.org (just like we do with cocoon - see [1]).
> That way we don't need to keep a copy of the source in our source tree.
>
> [1] http://cocoondev.org/repository/cocoon/resources/
>
> Regards,
> Karel
>
>   
>> Regards,
>> Michael
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> daisy community mailing list
>> Professional Daisy support: http://outerthought.org/en/services/daisy/support.html
>> mail to: daisy at lists.cocoondev.org
>> list information: http://lists.cocoondev.org/mailman/listinfo/daisy
>>     
> _______________________________________________
> daisy community mailing list
> Professional Daisy support: http://outerthought.org/en/services/daisy/support.html
> mail to: daisy at lists.cocoondev.org
> list information: http://lists.cocoondev.org/mailman/listinfo/daisy
>