| Re: [e4-dev] Move wrapper classes to platform? |
Where do people see the place of the plugin.xml in the long-run (versus a fragment.e4xmi)? Certainly the plugin.xml will be used for defining custom extension-points as it is now. But will any of the org.eclipse.ui.* extension points survive, or is the sentiment to [eventually] deprecate all of them in favor of fragments?If the preference in the long term is for fragments (+1), I would think it would make more sense to focus on wrapping under the covers / creating fragments on the fly from the plugin.xml 's.
From a pure e4 standpoint, whatever story is adopted for contributing pure e4 parts, I feel that it would be cleaner (and easier to learn) if one was chosen (plugin.xml vs fragment.e4xmi) instead of having both locations (IMHO).Right now it isn't clear to me if there is any preference.JDOn Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 8:39 AM, John Arthorne <John_Arthorne@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
You are both right, there is currently no story for contributing pure e4 parts to the workbench. But does anyone think this is the right answer in the long term? I would much rather see the existing extension points change to accept pure e4 parts, and if any wrapping is required, then *we* do the wrapping under the covers and not have plugin writers explicitly reference or know about them. If we add these wrappers to the platform and advocate that people use them, then when we come up with a better answer next year we would have to ask them to migrate again. And as we all know, once they are available and people are recommending them, it becomes much harder to remove them later. I completely understand the use case and the short term benefit though. Maybe including them in the e4 build and making them easier to consume is a middle ground that lets people use them if they want them, but makes it clear this is not the recommended long term direction? Anyway I leave it to Eric and Paul to make a decision here, it is maybe a good topic for the next e4 meeting.
John
From: Lars Vogel <lars.vogel@xxxxxxxxx>
To: E4 Project developer mailing list <e4-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>,
Date: 04/21/2013 03:21 PMSubject: Re: [e4-dev] Move wrapper classes to platform?
Sent by: e4-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
John,I agree with Tom. IMHO we have currently no story for IDE plugin developer to use the new programming model without the wrapper classes.
I'm more than happy to be corrected, is there a pure E4 way to contribute to the IDE?
On 19 Apr 2013 15:10, "John Arthorne" <John_Arthorne@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
If I remember correctly, the original intent of these wrappers was to provide forwards-compatibility, that is allow you to write your views/editors so they can run in both 3.x and 4.x while being able to make use of injection. Why would someone want to use such a layer in 4.3 and beyond? At this point I thought the path we want to encourage is to drop the ability to run in 3.x and move parts directly to the Eclipse 4 API. I'd hate to see people move to these parts and now have *two* layers of cruft between their parts and the Eclipse 4 framework (a forwards compatibility layer talking to a backwards compatibility layer talking to the framework). I see no problem that this stuff continues to exist for people who need to run on both 3.x and 4.x, but moving it into the platform somehow sanctions it as a good approach going forward. Is it?
John
From: Tom Schindl <tom.schindl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To:
Cc: E4 Project developer mailing list <e4-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: 04/18/2013 04:11 PM
Subject: Re: [e4-dev] Move wrapper classes to platform?
Sent by: e4-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
Hi,
Lars is right I wrote them ;-) and they are used without problems by the
model editor since their inception.
I think they are fairly done. There was a bug report from Jonas on some
disposing or selection stuff which is not 100% ok. He had a patch i
revoked because it would have destoryed the active context.
Like other things in e4.tools I'm not actively maintaining them anymore
because my focus has shifted away a bit but I'm always available to
answer questions and take a glance at patches (like I just did with Dirk
and broke the build the today/yesterday :-)
Their original ident was to make the model editor run in *3.x* (which it
still does?) maybe this support should be removed when moved to eclipse
4 proper?
I'm with Lars, don't make them API but give them more visibility!
BTW: There are many hidden secrets - I came up while doing the tooling
dev - in the e4.tools repo like this (refcount resource management, cool
new i18n support). Unless those get part of Eclipse Platform I plan to
move them to e(fx)clipse and move on there (not everything there is tied
to JavaFX)
Tom
On 18.04.13 21:34, Lars Vogel wrote:
> I definitely would be -1 on adding them as API but I think we may be
> able to add them to the platform for Kepler as non API and graduate them
> in 4.4.
>
> You find the relevant classes here:
> http://git.eclipse.org/c/e4/org.eclipse.e4.tools.git/tree/bundles/org.eclipse.e4.tools.compat/src/org/eclipse/e4/tools/compat/parts They
> are relatively small.
>
> Its hard for me to answer your question about the shape do you think
> they're in as I'm not familiar with the quality standards, maybe Tom,
> the original author, can comment on that? If we don't consider them API,
> we also have a few cycles left to clean them up, if necessary.
>
> Maybe someone from the platform can have a look at the classes and tell
> us what we need to do, to graduate these classes.
>
> The nice thing would be that we would have a story for IDE developer and
> the new programming model.
>
>
> 2013/4/18 Eric Moffatt <emoffatt@xxxxxxxxxx <mailto:emoffatt@xxxxxxxxxx>>
>
> Lars, I'm +1 with caveats...;-)
>
> I haven't looked at these classes so I don't know what shape they're
> in. My concerns are that this would effectively be adding new API
> late in the cycle (past our usual time). If we want to 'graduate'
> these classes to become part of the standard eclipse install they
> have to be up to 'release; standard (which is much stricter for IDE
> components than it is for incubation code). What are the classes and
> what shape do you think they're in ?
>
> I wish this had been brought up earlier, it's obvious that the
> Platform is the right place for this code but I'm wondering whether
> it may be better to hold off until Kepler releases and then make
> sure that this happens *early* (M1) in Luna. During Luna I hope that
> we can also look into graduating the Model and CSS editors but we'll
> have to see how we can do this since graduating them will place the
> code under the stricter 'Platform' standards and I don't want to
> inhibit the excellent rate of progress. Perhaps this is a non-issue
> since it's brand new code but we'll have to talk it over at least.
>
> Eric
>
>
> Inactive hide details for Lars Vogel ---04/18/2013 09:35:43 AM---Hi,
> The e4 tools project offers wrapper classes which allow toLars Vogel
> ---04/18/2013 09:35:43 AM---Hi, The e4 tools project offers wrapper
> classes which allow to wrap POJOs and
>
>
> From:
>
>
> Lars Vogel <lars.vogel@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:lars.vogel@xxxxxxxxx>>
>
> To:
>
>
> E4 Project developer mailing list <e4-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> <mailto:e4-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>>,
>
> Date:
>
>
> 04/18/2013 09:35 AM
>
> Subject:
>
>
>
> [e4-dev] Move wrapper classes to platform?
>
> Sent by:
>
>
> e4-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:e4-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
> Hi,
>
> The e4 tools project offers wrapper classes which allow to wrap
> POJOs and perform DI on them. The wrapper classes provide the old
> API, e.g. one of them extend ViewPart. This allows to use the new
> programming model for plug-in development. Tom Schindl did the the
> development.
>
> Is it an option to move the e4 wrapper classes to platform for
> Eclipse 4.3? This way people could easily start using the new
> programming model via the wrapper classes.
>
> I think as long as the wrapper classes remain in the e4 tools
> project their reach is relatively limited.
>
> IMHO offering the wrapper classes is a good start for a migration
> story for the Eclipse plug-in developers. Also the wrapper classes
> from Tom are relatively small.
>
> Best regards, Lars_______________________________________________
> e4-dev mailing list
> e4-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:e4-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/e4-dev
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> e4-dev mailing list
> e4-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:e4-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/e4-dev
>
>
_______________________________________________
e4-dev mailing list
e4-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/e4-dev
_______________________________________________
e4-dev mailing list
e4-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/e4-dev
_______________________________________________
e4-dev mailing list
e4-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/e4-dev
_______________________________________________
e4-dev mailing list
e4-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/e4-dev
_______________________________________________
e4-dev mailing list
e4-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/e4-dev