Skip to main content
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: RES: [dsdp-mtj-dev] Extension point for defining devices 
There are two extension point:

org.eclipse.jdt.launching.vmInstalls[1]
org.eclipse.jdt.launching.vmInstallTypes[2]

[1] http://help.eclipse.org/stable/index.jsp?topic=/org.eclipse.jdt.doc.isv/reference/extension-points/org_eclipse_jdt_launching_vmInstalls.html
[2] http://help.eclipse.org/stable/index.jsp?topic=/org.eclipse.jdt.doc.isv/reference/extension-points/org_eclipse_jdt_launching_vmInstallTypes.html

BR,
Danail

On Jan 27, 2009, at 10:33 PM, Paula Gustavo-WGP010 wrote:


Can you send me a reference to the extension point that describes the
JRE?

-----Mensagem original-----
De: dsdp-mtj-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:dsdp-mtj-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] Em nome de Danail Nachev
Enviada em: segunda-feira, 26 de janeiro de 2009 14:18
Para: Mobile Tools for The Java Platform mailing list
Assunto: Re: [dsdp-mtj-dev] Extension point for defining devices

My idea was to remove (in case you are already providing some kind of
extension for Eclipse) the need for the developer to go and import the
SDK. It will be already available once it has installed the tooling.
I was just mentioning that this way, p2 can used for SDK distribution if the vendor decide that it is appropriate. This however, will not impose 
any limitation to the SDK - it can be still UEI compatible and be
distributed as well as standalone zip.

My idea is similar to:
* Installed JRE preference page, where plugins can provide JREs
* Plug-in Development -> Target Platform page, where we have the notion 
of predefined targets
Both of the pages and associated extension points doesn't expose any
restrictions on the distribution or the structure of the SDK, but does
provide a way for a plugin to contribute (w/o user intervention) to the 
available entries.

Are we on the same page?

BR,
Danail Nachev
Senior Software Engineer/Development Tools
ProSyst Labs EOOD
-------------------------------------------------
stay in touch with your product.
-------------------------------------------------

Hildum Eric-XFQ473 wrote:

A critical point to consider is that SDK developers do not have only
Eclipse + MTJ as a target. Any plugin/P2 based solution will inherently 
be Eclipse only, thus will face adoption issues.


SDKs currently use the UEI specification as that is the only one out

there that is supported by all major IDEs.


Any proposed solution needs to be IDE agnostic as well as SDK

agnostic.



Eric Hildum
Senior Product Manager, Mobile Developer Tools & SDK
Software Platforms and Delivery
Ecosystem and Market Development
Motorola
Direct: +1-408-541-6809
Mobile: +1-510-305-0801

809 11th Avenue
Sunnyvale, CA 94089
USA

-----Original Message-----
From: dsdp-mtj-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx

[mailto:dsdp-mtj-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Gorkem Ercan

Sent: Monday, January 26, 2009 0:41
To: Mobile Tools for The Java Platform mailing list
Subject: Re: [dsdp-mtj-dev] Extension point for defining devices

Craig,
I totally understand, I hope that people, who wants to see that
feature sooner,  will be kind enough to offer help on the
implementation :)
In any case, it may be a good idea to have an enhancement request open 
for this (if there is not already one)
--
Gorkem

On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 2:20 AM, Craig Setera <craigjunk@xxxxxxxxxx>

wrote:

Gorkem,

I agree that the end goals are compatible and these should all be

considered

together.  We have a pretty serious open issue in terms of our

current

API's.  My assumption is that we will need to "finalize" the current
importer API for a 1.0 release and then look seriously at some of

these

other options as future additions.  I think we probably need to be

looking
seriously at controlling what else we sign up for relative to the 3.5 
release, especially in terms of API's.  In the future, we need to

spend

significantly more time working with the community as a whole to

propose and

iteratively develop new API's.

For those that are not already aware... The API's that currently

exist in

MTJ were originally created by me in EclipseME to service my own

needs with

no external input.  I won't claim that they are well suited for all
situations.  This was one of the discussion points when it was

decided to

restart MTJ with the EclipseME code base.  I was convinced by others

at the
time that what was there worked "well enough" as a starting point and 
that

we would work hard to improve the API/platform part of the code over

time.

I guess only time will tell! <grin>

Craig

Gorkem Ercan wrote:

Please take a look at the MADK proposal[1] that was proposed in the
Eclipse Mobile Industry Working Group [2]. I think the idea is the
same on both proposals.

Also there is an interesting discussion going on related to
downloading packages that are not EPL compatible [3], even when
downloading/installing through p2 there may be legal requirements.

I think this is a good feature that may lower the barriers for
starters and apparently this is a desired feature since it has been
voiced through several sources.


[1] http://wiki.eclipse.org/EMIWG/MADKQuickStartProposal
[2] http://wiki.eclipse.org/EMIWG
[3] https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=246945#c9

--
Gorkem



On Thu, Jan 22, 2009 at 9:00 PM, Adam Abramski <aabramski@xxxxxxx>

wrote:



As Paula has explained, this is definitely one of RIM's concerns.
Having more flexibility without imposing too much on the plug in
implementers is a better approach in my opinion as well.

Sincerely,
Adam



-----Original Message-----
From: dsdp-mtj-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:dsdp-mtj-dev-
bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Paula Gustavo-WGP010
Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2009 10:30 AM
To: Mobile Tools for The Java Platform mailing list
Subject: RES: [dsdp-mtj-dev] Extension point for defining devices

Hi danail,

Thanks for your interested on mtj!

Let me see if i understand your correctly your suggestion.
1- mtj will have a declarative way to describe an sdk / devices
2- this declarative way would be published via an extension point
3- each sdk provider (like nokia, mot or rim) would have a plugin

that
implements the EP and describe its sdk. The whole sdk also need to be 
provided as a set of plugins / binaries
4- the user would just use p2 to find / install / update sdks on his
eclipse
5- mtj would automatically find the installed sdks via the EP

If that's what you mean, I think that it is great idea. But probably


it


is hard to make it happen. The main issue that I see is that this


would
require all sdk providers to change their sdk distribution mechanism. 


So


instead of RIM providing a windows installer they would need to


provide


a p2 repository. This is a high impact on all providers and I don't


know


if they want to do that. if they don't them mtj would not be able to
support that specific sdk. What I like in the current device importer 
solution, which was inherited completely from eclipseme, is that it

is

really flexible. Mtj can support any sdk once the importer / editor


are


implemented. So we don't' force anything on the sdk side. There are
still some improvements that we can do on this area.

Maybe we can talk about proposing that, but we would still need to
support the current solution to be compatible with the sdks that are
already available.

Any thoughts?

:)
gep


-----Mensagem original-----
De: dsdp-mtj-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:dsdp-mtj-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] Em nome de Danail Nachev
Enviada em: quarta-feira, 21 de janeiro de 2009 13:07
Para: dsdp-mtj-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
Assunto: [dsdp-mtj-dev] Extension point for defining devices

Hi guys,

First, I want to say that the work you are doing with MTJ has been


long


awaited and MTJ will nicely complement the existing Eclipse tools
covering large portion of the software development.

So, straight to the point:

I couldn't find a way for a plugin to define new devices. There is a


way
to define importer, which can be used to detect new types of SDKs and 
there is an API, which can be called to add new devices to the


registry,


but there is no way for a plugin to state:

I'm a SDK for this and this device.

If a plugin can declaratively specify new devices:

* p2 can be used for Java ME SDK installation/update
* a vendor-specific IDE/extension can easily define the supported
devices (w/o complex code)

What do you think?

BR,
--
Danail Nachev
Senior Software Engineer/Development Tools
ProSyst Labs EOOD
-------------------------------------------------
stay in touch with your product.
-------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
dsdp-mtj-dev mailing list
dsdp-mtj-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/dsdp-mtj-dev
_______________________________________________
dsdp-mtj-dev mailing list
dsdp-mtj-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/dsdp-mtj-dev


---------------------------------------------------------------------
This transmission (including any attachments) may contain

confidential
information, privileged material (including material protected by the 
solicitor-client or other applicable privileges), or constitute

non-public

information. Any use of this information by anyone other than the

intended

recipient is prohibited. If you have received this transmission in

error,

please immediately reply to the sender and delete this information

from your

system. Use, dissemination, distribution, or reproduction of this
transmission by unintended recipients is not authorized and may be

unlawful.

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



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


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



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



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

Back to the top