-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.9k
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
Configuration for OpenRefine on Windows should use only 1 config file (.ini) #3057
Comments
By the way the OpenRefine project has funding available to work on this. Do you know someone who would be able to get this fixed? Send them our way! |
I had a quick look to estimate the difficulty of this task and put a reasonable price tag on it. The The name Therefore the simplest solution for this would probably be to adapt It should not be too hard to submit a patch to Launch4j to make this filename configurable, but it will probably take a while before this is merged and released, so that could be a follow-up issue on this. |
Just for fun I tried to make Launch4j configurable: https://sourceforge.net/p/launch4j/git/merge-requests/20/. |
Good news, my PR in Launch4j was merged so this filename should be configurable in the next Launch4j release. After that it should be possible for Windows and Linux to use the same configuration file. I am not sure about Mac OS though - for now the options seem to be loaded from some |
Update: this is still blocked by necessary changes in Launch4j. The following PR needs merging and releasing: https://sourceforge.net/p/launch4j/git/merge-requests/21/ |
Is your feature request related to a problem or area of OpenRefine? Please describe.
On Windows, OpenRefine has 2 .ini files that can be used for applying JVM settings. We should only have 1 .ini file.
Describe the solution you'd like
Allow the
openrefine.exe
launching to read settings from the refine.ini file only.Remove the
openrefine.l4j.ini
file from packaging.Describe alternatives you've considered
Additional context
Fixing this issue would be a better way to handle than just adding more documentation PR #3042 on this already confusing issue.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: