Sorry,
one small question remains.
In b3aggregator I can find the IU “org.ecplise.platform” by adding the Feature “org.eclipse.platform.feature.group” or by adding the Product
“org.ecplise.platform” (which also points to the Feature “org.eclipse.platform.feature.group”).
So basically both are the same, but yet they exist in two Categories. What’s the reason for this and which one should I choose for building my
Eclipse RCP application?
Best regards
Ahmet Bilgin
Von: platform-releng-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:platform-releng-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx]
Im Auftrag von David M Williams
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 23. Juni 2016 14:24
An: Eclipse platform release engineering list.
Betreff: Re: [platform-releng-dev] org.eclipse.platform vs.org.eclipse.platform.ide
> So my questions are:
> · Why the integration flag ?
We just keep doing "I-builds" until we are satisfied with one, and then "rename" it. And, you can not rename anything in the bundles, features or "versions" -- just the "outer" names of where things are collected as zip files, and similar.
So, yes, the "I" is expected. (In September, you will you will see the maintenance builds will be "M").
Why not do "one more build" and change everything to an "R"? Two reasons: a) something beyond our control could go wrong if depending on a "final build" so why bother, and b) We are often not sure if really is the final build until quite some time after
we produce the build -- by which time others have already been "building with" the build with the "I" qualifiers. Case in point, we did an "RC4a" build this season, but "internally" it is just a small change to I-qualifiers. Otherwise we'd need a "big change"
to have an additional "R-build".
> · What’s the difference between the two IUs:
> org.ecplise.platform and org.eclipse.platform.ide ?
> o Can I safely continue to use org.ecplise.platform instead of
> org.ecplise.platform.ide ?
org.eclipse.platform is the one you want. It is a "feature" which you can use to create your own "product" (product in the Eclipse sense). org.eclipse.platform.ide is a "product" and usually not the thing you want to "include".
HTH
From: Ahmet Bilgin <a.bilgin@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "platform-releng-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx" <platform-releng-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>,
Date: 06/23/2016 04:39 AM
Subject: [platform-releng-dev] org.eclipse.platform vs. org.eclipse.platform.ide
Sent by: platform-releng-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
Hello,
I’m using b3aggregator to create our company-internal Neon Release P2-Site. When adding the Neon Release repository as contribution to the b3aggregator,
I can see that the product org.eclipse.platform.ide still has the “Integration”-flag. Is this a mistake or intended?
I’m building an Eclipse RCP Application and have used the product org.eclipse.platform.ide in my PDE targetdefinition until now. Since Eclipse Neon is released I’ve expected that the integration
flag in the version specifier would be removed from this IU.
Instead I’m using the IU org.eclipse.platform now and my Eclipse RCP Application still can be build because it seems to have all the necessary dependencies included.
So my questions are:
· Why the integration flag ?
· What’s the difference between the two IUs: org.ecplise.platform and org.eclipse.platform.ide ?
o Can I safely continue to use org.ecplise.platform instead of org.ecplise.platform.ide ?
Best regards
Ahmet Bilgin
MAGMA Gießereitechnologie Gesellschaft für Gießerei-, Simulations- und Regeltechnik mbH | Kackertstr. 11, 52072 Aachen, Germany | Rechtsform GmbH, Amtsgericht Aachen HRB 3912,
UST-ID-Nr. DE121745780 | Geschäftsführung: Dr. Marc C. Schneider (Vorsitzender), Dr.-Ing. Jörg C. Sturm
_______________________________________________
platform-releng-dev mailing list
platform-releng-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/platform-releng-dev
