[mylyn-reviews-dev] org.eclipse.reviews.frame.core model

[alvaro sanchez <alvsan09@xxxxxxxxx>]

Hello Steffen, 
The two issues below have not been brought up so far,
See my comments below:

Comments are very welcome
/Alvaro


While
 we are discussing this... the API in org.eclipse.reviews.frame.core 
exposes EMF types. Is that intentional? It could make sense as clients 
are likely to extend the model but I was wondering if that has been 
discussed?
Alvaro: The core model is meant to be extended (few entities are abstract). However I am not sure I understand which elements cause the concern, as all model elements are returned with the type of an interface by the factory.  


What about concurrent access to the model? EMF is not inherently 
thread safe. Is there a bug for addressing this, e.g. through EMF 
Transactions?
Alvaro: Since the model is meant to be extended, I would assume the extended model would need to address thread safety and other recovery mechanisms e.g. ChangeDescripton, etc..



On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 10:11 AM, Steffen Pingel <steffen.pingel@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
The main difference with the tbr vs. tasks namespace is that we can leave out the reviews segment:

 org.eclipse.mylyn.reviews.

tasks.core  vs.

 org.eclipse.mylyn.tbr.core

While we are discussing this... the API in org.eclipse.reviews.frame.core exposes EMF types. Is that intentional? It could make sense as clients are likely to extend the model but I was wondering if that has been discussed?

What about concurrent access to the model? EMF is not inherently thread safe. Is there a bug for addressing this, e.g. through EMF Transactions?

Steffen