Re: [cdt-dev] ProjectDescription Storage: It should be possibleto exten

[James Blackburn <jamesblackburn@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 4:14 PM, James Blackburn
<jamesblackburn@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I intend to get a patch up for this this weekend

I've attached a patch and re-added the old tests to the bugzilla.
Changes are pretty much localised to the descriptor's getProjectData()
method to minimize risk of accidentally breaking anything.  It would
be good if this could be committed before the M5 build.

Cheers,

James


>
> Cheers,
>
> James
>
>
>>
>> ________________________________
>> From: cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On
>> Behalf Of Chris Recoskie
>> Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2009 3:52 PM
>> To: CDT General developers list.
>> Subject: Re: [cdt-dev] ProjectDescription Storage: It should be possibleto
>> extend / override persistence mechanism
>> Importance: Low
>>
>> I had more or less assumed based on past discussions (e.g. at the Summit)
>> that we were planning on breaking API to get the build system back to an
>> acceptable state. Perhaps I assumed too much.
>>
>> I should have fixed the API errors though. Seems I forgot to setup my
>> baseline again after my hard drive crashed in December. I take
>> responsibility for that.
>>
>> ===========================
>> Chris Recoskie
>> Team Lead, IBM CDT and RDT
>> IBM Toronto
>> "Schorn, Markus" <Markus.Schorn@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>
>>
>> "Schorn, Markus" <Markus.Schorn@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Sent by: cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
>>
>> 01/22/2009 04:41 AM
>>
>> Please respond to
>> "CDT General developers list." <cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>>
>> To
>> "CDT General developers list." <cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> cc
>>
>> Subject
>> [cdt-dev] ProjectDescription Storage: It should be possible to extend /
>> override persistence mechanism
>> Hi,
>> I have reopend the bug https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=252966
>> because the patch
>> breaks API in a non-compatible way. For those who use the API-tooling this
>> is a big annoyance,
>> because you get to see all the errors and it is hard to use the tooling to
>> check your own stuff.
>>
>> Either the breakage needs to be fixed, or the plugin version has to be
>> incremented and then the
>> breakage has to be documented. (I would actually expect a documentation
>> about breaking API plus a
>> discussion before the checkin).
>>
>> Furthermore the patch is large enough, such that the IP Policy requires
>> aproval from the Eclipse Member Organisation. We do not have the right to
>> violate the Eclipse rules.
>>
>> Markus.
>> _______________________________________________
>> cdt-dev mailing list
>> cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> cdt-dev mailing list
>> cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev
>>
>>
>