[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[ecf-dev] Re: emf and 1.4
- From: Markus Alexander Kuppe <ecf-dev_eclipse.org@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 09 Feb 2009 19:50:33 +0100
- Delivered-to: firstname.lastname@example.org
- User-agent: Thunderbird 188.8.131.52 (X11/20090105)
Scott Lewis wrote:
> Hi Markus,
> OK. The problem created by using EMF 2.2 (i.e. R2_2_maintenance branch)
> is that the EMF projects then have errors of the following form:
> Description Resource Path Location Type
> Plug-ins declaring extensions or extension points must set the singleton
> directive to true MANIFEST.MF org.eclipse.emf.common/META-INF
> line 4 Plug-in Problem
That appears to be a tooling issue. At runtime EMF 2.2 bundles start
> I've adjusted our releng project set files to point to EMF
> 2_2_Maintenance instead of 2.4...but then people will have to hack on
> the EMF 2_2 to add the singleton directive (or you can turn it off with
> settings I suppose). If you can do anything about that (the EMF
> manifest issues) please go ahead.
<lemmy> Hi Ed, org.eclipse.emf, org.eclipse.emf.edit.ui... from
R2_2_maintenance cause compile errors when imported in an Eclipse 3.5
SDK because of missing singleton statements in the Manifest.MF
<lemmy> Is there any known workaround?
<merks> Add them. :-P
<lemmy> ECF requires 2.2 to compile on Java 1.4 and we don't want
consumers of our project set files to be forced to add the missing stmts
<merks> Maybe there are preferences for this?
<merks> Are you building the EMF source?
<lemmy> Just in developer workspaces via project set files. In our
official builds we don't bundle EMF.
<merks> Maybe you should just import the binaries...
<merks> I'm not sure what to suggest otherwise.
<lemmy> And even if I set PDE to warning, it still flags the missing
singleton directive as an error. :(
<merks> Create a patch that must be applied whenever folks work with source.
<lemmy> Thanks, I'll see what I can do about it.
Scott, do you know hot to add binary dependencies in psf files?
Alternatively we might wanna drop psf files and just use map files like
WTP does . That way we also get rid of the redundancy between .map
and .psf files.
> BTW, have you heard from Jan about tomorrow (or anything)? I believe we
> need to chat (about the upcoming meeting with Siemens, and the RFC119
> work in general).
No, I haven't heard anything from Jan.