# java implementation part 3

**URL:** <https://discourse.openehr.org/t/java-implementation-part-3/12230>\
**Category:** Reference Implementation: Java (archive)\
**Created:** [17 January 2007 10:25 UTC](https://discourse.openehr.org/t/java-implementation-part-3/12230 "2007-01-17T10:25:23Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![system](https://discourse.openehr.org/uploads/default/original/2X/f/f0a1dedb20c42747bddcafd6c7df9db5f34f003c.svg) [@system](https://discourse.openehr.org/u/system)\
**Post date:** [17 January 2007 10:25 UTC](https://discourse.openehr.org/t/java-implementation-part-3/12230/1 "2007-01-17T10:25:23Z")

</div>

It is very good that we are changing plans. There is one disadvantage.  
It messes up the SVN-trees. You can't tell which Java files are new, and  
which are the same, because in SVN they are all new, because the tree  
has got another name  
For me this is very inconvenient, because, at this moment I cannot copy  
the Java-sources to my own work, because I am doing things  
different.than is done in the reference tree.\  
So I have to open and compare them manually, and see if there are any  
important changes, and if I have to do something with that.  
I think other people have the same problem.

A solution for this?  
I suggest, suggest  
maybe it will be handy to keep a source tree, only for version-purpose,  
so we can see which file is changed at last SVNupdate

thanks  
Bert