[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
|
Re: [dsdp-mtj-dev] Extension point for defining devices - Back on Track
|
My assumption would be the goal that the IDevice could be registered
directly without the need for going through the importer functionality.
I would further assume that it would still end up registered as an
instance of IDevice, but it would be "fully formed". It would be
similar to specifying the information that is currently persisted about
imported devices via extension point... If I were going to tackle
something like this, I would make two primary changes/additions:
1) Allow an SDK and IDevice(s) to be specified directly by extension
point. It would be up to the extension to generate/persist the
necessary configuration information. It would be outside the scope of
MTJ to do that, as each SDK/device may want to do this differently.
2) Add support into the current SDK/device list functionality for a
"reference". The reference could then point to these fully-formed devices.
Does that make sense and describe the goals?
Craig
Christian Kurzke wrote:
Gustavo, Craig, please correct me here, but I think this extension
point will
let you register a new device importer. This device importer then can
return the discovered "devices" in the SDK.
The devices need to implement the interface:
org.eclipse.mtj.core.model.device.IDevice
http://dsdp.eclipse.org/help/latest/topic/org.eclipse.mtj.doc.isv/html/reference/api/org/eclipse/mtj/core/model/device/IDevice.html
