[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Yet another nag note ... and, I mean it this time!
- From: Gunnar Wagenknecht <gunnar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 24 May 2012 09:39:39 +0200
- Delivered-to: email@example.com
- User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:12.0) Gecko/20120428 Thunderbird/12.0.1
Am 24.05.2012 09:19, schrieb Dennis Hübner:
> Sure there are greedy optional dependencies in the repository, because
> it often just intended by projects. I don't understand, why are you
> talking about *incorrect* greediness? "Not a default" it not the same as
> IMHO this  report is only useful for statistic purpose.
If it's really *intended* then the bundles should be listed under
"Optional runtime requirement with explicit greedy install." in the
report (or under "new publisher default" if optional dependencies are
included via feature.xml).
There are currently 337 bundles using the "old publisher default". If
the build system producing those bundles is updated to the new publisher
their installation behavior will change. With the new publisher their
optional dependencies will *not* be installed automatically anymore.
Thus, if installation of optional dependencies is really *intended* then
either greedy instructions must be added to p2.inf files or the optional
dependencies must be included within a feature.xml.