[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
|
RE: [cdt-dev] Vote for new CDT features
|
Given that time is starting to run short, here's my final proposal:
New projects:
org.eclipse.cdt.platform
org.eclipse.cdt.platform-feature
org.eclipse.cdt.platform.aix
org.eclipse.cdt.platform.aix-feature
org.eclipse.cdt.platform.linux
org.eclipse.cdt.platform.linux-feature
org.eclipse.cdt.platform.qnx
org.eclipse.cdt.platform.qnx-feature
org.eclipse.cdt.platform.solaris
org.eclipse.cdt.platform.solaris-feature
org.eclipse.cdt.platform.win32
org.eclipse.cdt.platform.win32-feature
Note the merging of the linux features and the new aix feature which is
almost operational but not officially supported in 1.2. The contents of
these would match the current contents of their equivalents without the
'.platform', which would then be enlarged to include the platform, make,
and managedmake features for 1.2.
I'd also like to address the os.ws plugins (e.g. linux.gtk) but we may be
running out of time for this in 1.2. This would entail creating the
following projects and deal with obsoleting projects at a later date:
org.eclipse.cdt.linux
org.eclipse.cdt.linux-feature
org.eclipse.cdt.qnx
org.eclipse.cdt.qnx-feature
org.eclipse.cdt.solaris
org.eclipse.cdt.solaris-feature
Any more votes/comments or are we ready to go? I have a major bug for
this, BTW :-)
Cheers,
Doug Schaefer, Senior Software Developer
IBM Rational Software, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Douglas Schaefer/Ottawa/IBM@IBMCA
Sent by: cdt-dev-admin@xxxxxxxxxxx
09/23/2003 10:58 AM
Please respond to
cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To
cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
cc
Subject
RE: [cdt-dev] Vote for new CDT features
I like that idea. To help promote the CDT base as a platform and to avoid
overload of the term core, I would call it
org.eclipse.cdt.platform-feature.
Doug Schaefer, Senior Software Developer
IBM Rational Software, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Sebastien Marineau <sebastien@xxxxxxx>
Sent by: cdt-dev-admin@xxxxxxxxxxx
09/23/2003 10:46 AM
Please respond to
cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To
"'cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx'" <cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
cc
Subject
RE: [cdt-dev] Vote for new CDT features
I'm partial to option 1 as well -- definitely the easiest for
users. If companies want to bundle a subset of CDT, then they
can "split it apart" and only take the base pieces they wish.
As for the name, that's a good question. org.eclipse.cdt.product
could be misleading; I'm thinking we should almost
use the org.eclipse.cdt-feature plugin (existing one) as the
super-feature, and create one that is the core feature
(e.g. org.eclipse.cdt.core-feature) that maps to what
the cdt-feature does today.
Thoughts?
Seb
>
> Any more comments on this proposal (Sebastien?). It looks
> like the most
> popular option is to create a new set of features that
> contain a superset
> of the CDT features. I'm not sure what to call it,
> org.eclipse.cdt.product, org.eclipse.cdt.all, ...
>
> Doug Schaefer, Senior Software Developer
> IBM Rational Software, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
>
>
>
> Douglas Schaefer/Ottawa/IBM@IBMCA
> Sent by: cdt-dev-admin@xxxxxxxxxxx
> 09/18/2003 03:11 PM
> Please respond to
> cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
>
>
> To
> cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> cc
>
> Subject
> Re: [cdt-dev] Vote for new CDT features
>
>
>
>
>
>
> I can buy that. I guess what I'm looking for is the version
> of the CDT
> that people looking to eclipse.org will download for free for
> their daily
> use, or the one that matches the Borland C++BuilderX feature
> set, or the
> one some guy writes about for the C/C++ User's Journal. For
> these people,
> a clean update site with a simple install is a must.
>
> My focus is wide spread adoption of the CDT, yet I can understand the
> various partners focus on their specific customers, and given the
> architecture of the CDT, I think we can keep everyone happy
> :-). I don't
> like the idea of the CVS project explosion, but then that's
> one time pain
> for user's gain. I'll change my vote to +1, +1, -1, which
> given Dave's
> recent vote makes option 1 the leader at the moment.
>
> Doug Schaefer, Senior Software Developer
> IBM Rational Software, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
>
>
>
> "Alain Magloire" <alain@xxxxxxx>
> Sent by: cdt-dev-admin@xxxxxxxxxxx
> 09/18/2003 02:45 PM
> Please respond to
> cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
>
>
> To
> cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> cc
>
> Subject
> Re: [cdt-dev] Vote for new CDT features
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >
> > Hey all, now that we've extracted the builders out of the CDT
> "platform",
> > the CDT platform features become pretty useless on their
> own. To help
> the
> > user who is simply downloading the CDT from the update
> site, I see two
> > alternatives to make their life easier (and one not):
> >
> > 1) Create new CDT "product" features that include the CDT
> platform and
> the
> > two make builders. This would be one new feature/plugin
> combination for
> > each os.ws we currently have.
> > 2) Include dependencies from the current platform features
> to the two
> make
> > builders and have those who want to remove the builders from their
> > products to hand edit the feature.xml files off stream.
> > 3) Too bad, they'll just have to get used to downloading all the
> features
> > the want individually and we'll deal with the user mistakes in the
> > newgroups/bugzilla.
> >
> > I'd like to see a vote by the various committers on this as
> to which
> > alternative they prefer.
> >
> > I am +1 on option 2, -1 on option 3, and a zero (in more
> ways than one)
> on
> > option 1.
> >
>
> I like:
> (1) +1
> (2) -1
> (3) 0
>
>
> The rational:
> - CDT is also a framework that in itself does not do much except to
> provide
> a "rendez-vous" point for all the modules to work in cooperation.
> It provides basic/common C/C++ environment i.e. CEditor,
> C-Parser, views
>
> etc ...
>
> - The full potential can be reach when "enhance" with the appropriate
> plugins.
>
> - CDT should come with a complete implementation of those
> frameworks, GDB
> for the
> debugger and managed make for the builder etc ..
>
> I can see the complete CDT product i.e. with gdb/mi, managed
> make, GNU
> make
> etc ... as a brand(default) product.
>
> And let other compagnies, TimeSys, Tensillica, QnX have there
> own product
> base on
> the core.
>
> _______________________________________________
> cdt-dev mailing list
> cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> http://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> cdt-dev mailing list
> cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> http://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> cdt-dev mailing list
> cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> http://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev
>
_______________________________________________
cdt-dev mailing list
cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
http://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev
_______________________________________________
cdt-dev mailing list
cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
http://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev
