[omniORB] Implementation Repository

[James Waller]

Hi,

 > Duncan may have more suggestions (I've been making them as though I know
 > what I'm doing ;) but istm that all is good. I might suggest renaming
 > "common" to "lib" as is done in the omniORB distro.

Yes, that makes sense.

Sorry about the delay with the updated tarball. I've had a hell of a 
week. I will work on modifying the directory structure of omniImR 
tomorrow and creating manpages, then send the update to you immediately. 
Most of the omniImR support library classes now have doxygen comments in 
them. Hopefully once this is done, we can create a top-level CVS module 
for it as Duncan suggested.

Have you had the chance to try out omniImR yet? I'm interested in 
finding out what you think of it so far.

Cheers,
James


Thomas Lockhart wrote:
> ...
> 
>> The sample config file would be placed at the top level. This is 
>> closer to the omniORB package's structure. What do you think?
> 
> 
> Duncan may have more suggestions (I've been making them as though I know 
> what I'm doing ;) but istm that all is good. I might suggest renaming 
> "common" to "lib" as is done in the omniORB distro.
> 
> I'm happy to help with autoconf support (I'll use it for RPM building 
> etc). And I'm looking forward to trying things out, which I haven't yet 
> done. Is a new tarball imminent, or do I have time to poke at what is 
> already here?
> 
>                      - Tom
> 
> 
>