Bug 453902 - Avoid nested EPackage
Summary: Avoid nested EPackage
Status: RESOLVED WONTFIX
Alias: None
Product: Sirius
Classification: Modeling
Component: Core (show other bugs)
Version: unspecified   Edit
Hardware: PC Linux
: P3 enhancement (vote)
Target Milestone: ---   Edit
Assignee: Project inbox CLA
QA Contact:
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords: triaged
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2014-12-02 10:56 EST by Esteban DUGUEPEROUX CLA
Modified: 2018-05-04 11:08 EDT (History)
2 users (show)

See Also:

Attachments
A draft of standalone program to split EPackage in their own file (4.87 KB, text/x-java)
2015-01-16 11:47 EST, Esteban DUGUEPEROUX CLA 		no flags Details
A draft of standalone program to split EPackage in their own file (5.16 KB, text/x-java)
2015-01-19 04:09 EST, Esteban DUGUEPEROUX CLA 		no flags Details
Show Obsolete (1) View All Add an attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.)

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Esteban DUGUEPEROUX CLA 2014-12-02 10:56:25 EST 
According to EMF community, nested EPackage in .ecore file is not recommended, but in Sirius we have that.
This bugzilla is to have each EPackage in its own .ecore file.
Comment 1 Pierre-Charles David CLA 2014-12-30 09:09:04 EST 
Tentatively putting this in 3.0M5, at least to evaluate the compatibility issues (i.e. would this require a migration? would this break APIs?).
Comment 2 Esteban DUGUEPEROUX CLA 2015-01-16 11:47:37 EST 
Created attachment 250002 [details]
A draft of standalone program to split EPackage in their own file
Comment 3 Esteban DUGUEPEROUX CLA 2015-01-19 04:09:06 EST 
Created attachment 250028 [details]
A draft of standalone program to split EPackage in their own file
Comment 4 Eclipse Genie CLA 2015-02-18 05:34:41 EST 
WARNING: this patchset contains 6333 new lines of code and may require a Contribution Questionnaire (CQ) if the author is not a committer on the project. Please see:https://wiki.eclipse.org/Project_Management_Infrastructure/Creating_A_Contribution_Questionnaire
Comment 5 Pierre-Charles David CLA 2015-02-23 08:34:52 EST 
Moving out of 3.0, as the impact is significant and the gains difficult to measure/justify.