[izpack-users] Shortcut Panel creates an EMPTY file as ashortcut

[Bartz, Klaus]

Hi Yurii,

>-----Original Message-----
>From: izpack-users-bounces at lists.berlios.de
>[mailto:izpack-users-bounces at lists.berlios.de]On Behalf Of J-Pro
>Sent: Thursday, October 26, 2006 7:37 PM
>To: izpack-users at lists.berlios.de
>Subject: Re: [izpack-users] Shortcut Panel creates an EMPTY file as
>ashortcut
>
>
>Good afternoon, Klaus.
>
>Thanks for testing for me. 

No problem, I have so much time that I can test snippets from
others which have no lust to do it self.

>I've just tried the exact example I sent you and 

after all now...

>it worked with me too. 

Oh, have I tested right.

>In the case when it didn't work, there was different only name, 
>it contained symbols ':' and ' '. And it contained more symbols. 

Yes, "only". Nobody knows that file names on Windows have not to contain 
\/:*?"<>|
Why does nobody see the error box from explorer if he tries to change
a name to some contains it? Because nobody do it.
Additional nobody knows that a part of the representation of a shortcut
is a file. But why should the common rule also apply to such special
files??

>So it was this way:  "...... <shortcut os="windows"  name="JPR: Jennys 
>Permanent Reconnector" ..... ". Sorry I didn't write it to you 
>from the very start... it's just a commercial project and I signed an 
>important contract "to not tell anybody.... blah, blah, blah...". Sorry again.
>

And we know that there are boobies like me which gaves support for
such things... I hope I have generated much money for you.

>
>Please, try this example. I wonder if there is no bugs with 
>long name or ':' 
>and ' ' symbols.
>

I am happy that you allow me to test for you. Thanks. I have
not to test to know that you are not right and therefore you
can wonder.

>
>Now I'm fine with shortcuts, really thanks for your help.
>
>

I will be happy if I can solve your next problem.

Klaus


As clarification: 
I have no problem if someone uses IzPack for a commercial 
project. I do it also.
I have no problem if someone sends us a snippet which contains
a oversight.
I have no problem if someone changes the code to fog internal
things because this is an open list; but he/she has to test
the changed code.

I have a little problem if someone means he/she can use IzPack
for learning java.

I have a big problem if someone sends us snippet which 
contains changed code, but where never tested in that
occurrence. Then I get the feeling I am a worker for free
for him. That's not the idea of free software.

>
>
>_______________________________________________
>izpack-users mailing list
>izpack-users at lists.berlios.de
>https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/izpack-users
>