| Re: [ecf-dev] Two issues I feel that needs a healthydiscussion overbefore ECF 1.0... |
I'm +1 for refactoring out the ECF runtime into multiple packages. I think this would be a nice way to keep track of things and required for 1.0. It would also give us the ability to follow the Eclipse API guidelines (ie., mark things internal when they should be). Let's talk about this on the next call?
One reason why identity would be used without containers is that I recall the Higgins project (and some other projects) had a concept of identity and having ECF's identity bundle separate from the rest of ECF would help adoption.
Cheers,
~ Chris
"Erkki Lindpere" <villane@xxxxxxxxx>
> >> identity (namespace extension point): org.eclipse.ecf.core.identity
> >> container (containerFactory extension point):
> >> org.eclipse.ecf.core.container
> >> shared object (sharedObjectFactory extension point):
> >> org.eclipse.ecf.core.sharedobject
> >
> > What exactly is going to be identity? The IContainer interface defines
> > methods that requires Namespaces and IDs, so how do you plan to split
> > those two apart?
>
> The 'container' bundle would have to depend upon the identity bundle.
> I'm thinking that the identity bundle could contain just
> org.eclipse.ecf.core.identity.*
I'm not that familiar with all the APIs & implementations, but where
would identity be used without containers?
Erkki
_______________________________________________
ecf-dev mailing list
ecf-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ecf-dev
