Community
Participate
Working Groups
From a newsgroup discussion: ----------------------- "Frank Budinsky" <frankb@ca.ibm.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag news:3E0C7A28.19F7EDA1@ca.ibm.com... > How about GEF provide an alternate packaging for EMF users, gef_for_emf.zip, or > something like that, that doesn't include it's own copy of the common command > interfaces, but instead "requires" the EMF ones to be there. Why? How about make a seperate "command" package that can be shared not only between GEF and EMF? It can be publicized via an "Eclipse Common Tools" page. It's always the same. There are a lot of good implementations in several Eclipse plugins and every plugin copies the code insted of sharing it. It's really anoying. Look into CDT and JDT they have complete redundant UI packaged which could be really helpfull for other developers. ----------------------------- I don't know where it will fit best because IMHO all components are involved. Please feel free to move it and share it between the possible components. I'd like to see an "Eclipse Common Tools" project which covers redundant code that can be shared across two or more plug-ins.
>Look into CDT and JDT they have complete redundant UI packaged >which could be really helpfull for other developers. CDT had to copy a lot of code to be feature compatible with the Java editor in 2.0. In 2.1 we have pushed down a lot of the Java Editor features into the base platform. It is now up to the components to migrate from their copied to code to the platform provided code. I don't say we have fully solved this problem but we made good progress.
Good to hear. What about the custom "Dialogs" (StatusDialog and subclasses) with the "DialogFields". It's IMHO a usefully framework. Cu, Gunnar
DialogFields have the status of an internally used framework only. If you would like to get it promoted to a published framework/API then please post a separate feature request against Platform UI.
filled as bug 32499
The forms UI framework used by plugin.xml editor and update manager UI is another possible candidate to share code. I think it is a good idea to reference all related bug reports here. IMHO the "depends on" field is a good candidate.
This request seems to cover many topics. See bug 37716. I would suggest resolving this as a duplicate of that 3.0 plan item, and if there are any other candidates (other than commands and 32499), open additional bugzillas to track each.
Agreed. Please enter more specific API feature requests where you think sharing would be useful. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 37716 ***
