[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
|
Re: [p2-dev] Publisher question, feature requirements
|
On 04/14/2010 03:18 PM, Pascal Rapicault wrote:
So is there a bug in the metadata generator for features? No, the behaviour is by design. Can it be changed? no this would break backward compatibility. Can it be improved in some ways in the future, yes.
OK, fair enough. I just want to make sure that we interpret this the
same way in Bucky and b3.
I think the authoring story using the feature as the vehicle for
publishing needs some love. From a provisioning perspective it has no
meaning if one use inclusion or requirements but at present the author
must consider that:
- when a plug-in or feature is included, it is possible to specify a
filter. The version is however strict.
- when a plug-in or feature is required, filters are not an option. But
the version can be a range.
This is too limiting and it can also be hard to comprehend. At least for
newcomers that don't know the history behind the current design. Are
there any improvements planned for this?
- thomas
HTH
On 2010-04-14, at 4:51 AM, Thomas Hallgren wrote:
Hi,
There are two ways of adding a feature reference in a feature. It can be either 'included' or 'required'. My interpretation has always been:
'included' features will be installed when the parent feature is installed.
'required' features serves as a prerequisite. They will not get installed. Instead, an error will be generated if they are not present.
Is that a correct interpretation?
If it is, then shouldn't this be reflected by the 'greedy' status of the IRequirement? From the wiki:
"When a requirement is marked greedy (greediness flag on a requirement), installable units satisfying the requirements are added to the solution, whereas IU satisfying non greedy requirements should be added to the solution by another requirement. By default all requirements are greedy."
To me, that sounds like a 1-1 correspondance to the 'includes' versus 'requires'.
The reason I ask is that I cannot find any indication that this is considered in the publisher FeaturesAction. I'm not sure that my interpretation is correct so I thought I'd ask here before I file a bug.
Thanks,
- thomas
_______________________________________________
p2-dev mailing list
p2-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/p2-dev
_______________________________________________
p2-dev mailing list
p2-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/p2-dev
