Hi craig,
Thanks for the comments.
You raised a good point about the
persistence. Initially a thought that it would make sense to always persistent all
devices and then in the next startup, see if anything changed and do the update
(remove and/or add devices). But reading to what you wrote, maybe it makes sense
to just keep everything in memory. But I think that this approach will have a
bigger impact on the code since currently everything is somehow based on what
is persisted. I will take a look at the code to see how to do it
J
gep
De: dsdp-mtj-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:dsdp-mtj-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] Em
nome de Craig Setera
Enviada em: domingo, 15 de março
de 2009 22:54
Para: Mobile Tools for The Java
Platform mailing list
Assunto: Re: [dsdp-mtj-dev]
Automatic sdk install extension point
Looking at this, I think there is too much emphasis on
SDK "install". Install implies that something needs to be
done. In reality, I think it is really just an SDK. My inclination
would be an extension point named:
org.eclipse....sdk
With a sequence of 1...* "sdk" elements. I personally don't
think these are installers at all. In addition, I think it needs to be
made clear that there isn't *any* device persistence on the part of the
platform for this. The SDK implementation will create the instances each
time they are queried and the resulting device needs to stay with the same
name/identifier so projects that reference the device will continue to see the
device.
Craig
Paula Gustavo-WGP010 wrote:
Hi,
I Just updated mtj wiki with a brief initial proposal
for the extension point.
http://wiki.eclipse.org/DSDP/MTJ/Discussion/New_APIs/version_1.0/automatic_SDK_install
Comments are welcome,
I’m working on an initial prototype of it. Once
I have something I create a patch and attach to bugzilla.
J
gep
_______________________________________________
dsdp-mtj-dev mailing list
dsdp-mtj-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/dsdp-mtj-dev