Re: [e4-dev] Re-exporting Require-Bundle

[Paul Webster <pwebster@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 9:56 AM, Oleg Besedin<obesedin@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> +1 for not re-exporting.
>
> In addition to evils of re-exporting that John and Tom described, I strongly
> believe that E4 UI should not leak EMF artifacts through its APIs.

+1 for not re-exporting in principle, but ...

1) one of the goals in e4 is to make eclipse easier to consume and
develop to.  The advantage of consuming something like org.eclipse.ui
from a developer point of view is that it is straight forward
(although it is a maintainer nightmare).   You get what you need.  If
we don't re-export, how will we present simply to the user "you need
this, and this, and this"?

2) I know in a world that can see more OSGi Import-Package is
preferred over Require-Bundle.  It makes it easier to replace the
actual implementation (see com.ibm.icu and com.ibm.icu.base).   But
the tooling isn't quite as full featured as Require-Bundle and the
best practices needed (like all bundle providers must version your
package exports) are not in place.

3) While we have some time to consider the different aspects of what
should be the modeled workbench and what should be modeled UI and what
technology should or should not be exposed, the e4 0.9 release will
release with EMF exposed and used from the modeled workbench layer.

4) I had another thought, but it is gone now :-)

PW


-- 
Paul Webster
Hi floor.  Make me a sammich! - GIR