Skip to content

abstract asset storage #33

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

klarose
Copy link

@klarose klarose commented Aug 15, 2022

The license for open-web-start is BSD 3-clause. The third clause
essentially prohibits non-copyright-holders from using the project
'trademarks'. While it calls out only the name of the project/copyright
holders, for good measure I don't want to use any of the assets if I
package this in another binary.

This change abstracts the GUI assets so the packager is responsible for
provisioning them. This isn't the best interface, since the set of
assets is not encoded in the interface, meaning a new version could
break compatibility without the compiler catching it. But, it works well
enough. We could always extend the interface to have explicit getters in
the future if it proves problematic.

Note: I noticed that some of the assets in the generated file don't actually exist. I'm not sure if this is intentional or not. I also noticed that it was checked in despite being in .gitignore. Either way, I kept the generated file the same, excepting the package name. I didn't regenerate it.

The license for open-web-start is BSD 3-clause. The third clause
essentially prohibits non-copyright-holders from using the project
'trademarks'. While it calls out only the name of the project/copyright
holders, for good measure I don't want to use any of the assets if I
package this in another binary.

This change abstracts the GUI assets so the packager is responsible for
provisioning them. This isn't the *best* interface, since the set of
assets is not encoded in the interface, meaning a new version could
break compatibility without the compiler catching it. But, it works well
enough. We could always extend the interface to have explicit getters in
the future if it proves problematic.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant