Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [wtp-dev] Review Requested: Proposed (updated) feature/component definitions for WTP


I need a little work on my URL pasting ... the bug I opened to document comments is at

https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=108186


And, I forgot to mention, some of the detail in the document is my first "best guess"
at that detail, the component leads will need to review and correct my errors, especially
in the areas of j2ee and web services. But hopefully the "big picture" is still correct,
desired, acceptable, and achievable.







David M Williams/Raleigh/IBM@IBMUS
Sent by: wtp-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx

08/26/2005 11:58 PM

Please respond to
"General discussion of project-wide or architectural issues."

To
wtp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
cc
Subject
[wtp-dev] Review Requested: Proposed (updated) feature/component        definitions for WTP






I have been working an a document to update our "feature level

component" definitions and relationships. (Its hard to find the right

term ... please read document, and suggest improvements, if needed  :)


http://www.eclipse.org/webtools/development/arch_and_design/subsystems/SubsystemsAndFeatures.html


I'd like to propose we actual start building things in the way

described in that document. This will be important to "do the right

way" in order to allow


       1. Eclipse Members who extend or "repackage" WTP to  coexist in

       a users installed environment. (without having to "hack" the

       core deliverables).


       2. The documentation to be correctly partitioned for

       "repackaging".


       3. the sdk and tests portions of WTP to be meaningful even in

       different configurations.


Oh, and it also enforces good practices on having clear well documented

dependancies, such as between "UI" and "model" level function, for

example.


There's only a few "new ideas" in the document, the rest are just fine tuning and getting specific about

what's already been documented and started pre 0.7 (but not finished due to time/resource constraints).


One thing that's not new is the core vs. UI distinction ... I (and

others) opened bugs on some obvious errors in some areas of our design

... so ... time to fix those. I'd like to propose we actually "enforce"

this in our builds so model-level code can be built (in theory) without

the UI pieces.  (I say in theory, because I'm  not suggesting we

actually "deliver" that way, or anything.)


There are two new things in the document that need committer,

community, and adapter review:


1. One critical, I believe, but a new way of thinking for us in WTP. We

need a better division for our "product adapters". As the recent note to

this list about the Geronimo Server Adapter implied, the source of our

product adapters will be a continually changing story (both literally as

to the source location of the adapter, but also indirectly based on the

packaging decisions of WTP adapters) so we need to "wall off" those

adapters so the core features do not have to be repackage to accommodate

those changes. This is the sort of change that is not needed for our WTP

needs per se, but is needed for us to be a "good citizen" in the whole

Eclipse community of add-on adapters and extenders.


2. Less critical, but also a new way of thinking  ... I'd like to

propose our JUnit tests be packaged along with the rest of the SDK

builds. I think this simplifies our "download pages" but more

importantly, I'd like to better foster the idea that anyone doing "SDK

level work" should always have the tests that go with that version of

the SDK. Not only does this encourage them to run the tests often as

they consider code changes or submitted patches, but some would say that

ideally the JUnit tests are part of the "spec" of some function or

API's. I'll be evaluating the increase in download size, but would hope

that would not be an inhibitor.


So ... take a look, feel free to comment. I've opened the following

enhancement request so we can capture any discussion or decisions in one

place:


http://www.eclipse.org/webtools/development/arch_and_design/subsystems/SubsystemsAndFeatures.html


Oh, and BTW, Naci is working on related document for our build

requirements and process, and while we have compared notes, and seen

earlier drafts of each others document, I'm sure we'll have some

coordination to do once both are documented ... I am hoping his is

clearly in the "how" portion of what we do, mine is intended to

be in the "what" portion.

_______________________________________________
wtp-dev mailing list
wtp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/wtp-dev


Back to the top