Re: why I think SWT should be built from eclipse

[Nitin Dahyabhai <nitind at us dot ibm dot com>]

Matthias Klose wrote:
> Shaun Jackman writes:
>
> > 2005/10/14, Michael Koch <konqueror@gmx.de>:
> >
> > > On Fri, Oct 14, 2005 at 03:21:49PM -0600, Shaun Jackman wrote:
> > > >  * SWT is a library in itself, and can and does exist outside of Eclipse.
> > > It doesnt exist yet. There are no separate releases.
> > True, at present there are no well-supported source releases of SWT.
>
> > > >  * SWT is used by other applications besides Eclipse.
> > > Sure and thats no problem. But Eclipse is tied to the same release of
> > > SWT.
> > That's fine. The Eclipse and SWT package can move in unison.
> As you see, it's a maintainance burden, I don't see 3.1.1 packages.

Actually, there are separate SWT-only builds posted on the "Other 
downloads for 3.1.1" page 
(http://download.eclipse.org/downloads/drops/R-3.1.1-200509290840) 
under the heading "SWT Binary and Source".  I can't vouch for them 
having been built using a separate process pulling the sources 
directly from CVS, however, as I'm no expert at the build system. 
Is this what you were looking for?