RE: [eclipse.org-planning-council] RE:[cross-project-issues-dev] Feedbac

[Christian Damus <cdamus@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi, Martin,

Thanks; I didn't follow the EMF feature
discussion very closely, but that certainly makes sense.  I hope users
will know not to root around in the "Enabling Features" category
for themselves!

The EMF-QTV runtime features aren't
large, but if somebody wants to raise me a bug to add them to the Enabling
Features, I'll be more than happy to do it (it isn't difficult).  It
seemed simpler to me to group these three components that are commonly
used together (a la "Luxury EMF";  thanks, Dejan).

Cheers,

Christian

---

Christian W. Damus
Component Lead, Eclipse OCL
and EMF-QTV
IBM
Rational Software

"Oberhuber, Martin" <Martin.Oberhuber@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent by: eclipse.org-planning-council-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx

06/04/07 01:34 PM

Please respond to
"eclipse.org-planning-council"        <eclipse.org-planning-council@xxxxxxxxxxx>

To	"eclipse.org-planning-council" <eclipse.org-planning-council@xxxxxxxxxxx>
cc	Cross project issues <cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Dejan Glozic/Toronto/IBM@IBMCA
Subject	RE: [eclipse.org-planning-council]        RE:[cross-project-issues-dev]        Feedback on the europa update site

Hello Christian,
 
yes if a feature is <include>
d in some other feature, it does not need to be listed in site.xml.
 
BUT if some other feature <requires>
one of your only-<included> features, UM will 
select the smallest available
container that <includes> the required feature. Therefore,
end users may end up downloading
more (sometimes much more) than they actually need.
 
This is what we've tried to sort
out for EMF together with Nick Boldt and Ed Merks,
and what finally was resolved
by exposing some of the <included> features under
"Enabling Features"
in order to make sure that somebody who <requires> only
the small components also gets
teh small components only and not the large
chunk with all the stuff it requires
in turn (in this case, JDT).

Cheers,
--
Martin Oberhuber
Wind River Systems, Inc.
Target Management Project Lead, DSDP PMC Member
http://www.eclipse.org/dsdp/tm

 

---

From: eclipse.org-planning-council-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:eclipse.org-planning-council-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf
Of Christian Damus
Sent: Monday, June 04, 2007 7:22 PM
To: eclipse.org-planning-council
Cc: Cross project issues; Dejan Glozic
Subject: Re: [eclipse.org-planning-council] RE:[cross-project-issues-dev]
Feedback on the europa update site


As an example, the EMF-QTV components are contributed to Europa as a pair
of features: 

    Eclipse Modeling Framework Data Integrity Frameworks Extender
SDK 
    Eclipse Modeling Framework Data Integrity Frameworks End-User
Features 

Both of these comprise, respectively, the SDK and Run-time features of
these three distinct components, to roll them into one.

Each component individually has two run-time features, so that the all-in-one
run-time Europa feature contains: 

    org.eclipse.emf.emfqtv.all 
       - org.eclipse.emf.query 
       - org.eclipse.emf.query.ocl 
       - org.eclipse.emf.transaction
       - org.eclipse.emf.workspace 
       - org.eclipse.emf.validation
       - org.eclipse.emf.validation.ocl

where nesting shows <include>ed features.  None of these six
included features is listed in the Europa site.xml.  If these features
had, instead, been prereqed via <requires> at either the feature
or plug-in level, then I think it may have been necessary to expose them
in the site.xml. 

AFAIK, update manager has no problem with multiple features <include>ing
the same features, so perhaps <include> can be used more extensively
to avoid filling up the site.xml. 

Hope that helps to clarify, 

Christian

---

Christian W. Damus
Component Lead, Eclipse OCL
and EMF-QTV
IBM
Rational Software

"Oberhuber, Martin" <Martin.Oberhuber@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent by: eclipse.org-planning-council-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx

06/04/07 12:44 PM

Please respond to
"eclipse.org-planning-council"        <eclipse.org-planning-council@xxxxxxxxxxx>

To	"Cross project issues" <cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
cc	Dejan Glozic/Toronto/IBM@IBMCA, "eclipse.org-planning-council" <eclipse.org-planning-council@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject	[eclipse.org-planning-council] RE: [cross-project-issues-dev]        Feedback on the europa update site

My memory might fool me, but I think that my experience has shown me so
far, that 
"Select Required" does NOT work for features which are available
on the site but not 
listed on site.xml . After all, UM would not be able to display a selection
for such 
features, would it? And, how would it know that these features exist after
all? I don't 
think it scans the remote directory, I even don't think it would be capable
of doing that 
through the http: protocol. 
  
I have no time to verify this again now, but I'd recommend Bjorn to wait
with changes 
to the build system until someone has verified what "Select Required"
does. 
  
Perhaps Dejan knows off the top of his head?

Cheers,
--
Martin Oberhuber
Wind River Systems, Inc.
Target Management Project Lead, DSDP PMC Member
http://www.eclipse.org/dsdp/tm

---

From: cross-project-issues-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:cross-project-issues-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Jeff
McAffer
Sent: Monday, June 04, 2007 4:30 PM
To: Cross project issues
Cc: cross-project-issues-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx; Cross project issues;
eclipse.org-planning-council
Subject: Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Feedback on the europa update
site


Note that I said, 
       " Of course, there may well be a reality issue
blocking this theory... "
Please confirm that this all works as described, expected, desired before
going off and doing Europa-wide changes. 

Jeff

Bjorn Freeman-Benson <bjorn.freeman-benson@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent by: cross-project-issues-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx

06/04/2007 10:15 AM

Please respond to
Cross project issues <cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>

To	Cross project issues <cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>, "eclipse.org-planning-council" <eclipse.org-planning-council@xxxxxxxxxxx>
cc
Subject	Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Feedback on the europa update site

Hmm, I learn something new every day... Ok, I will modify the Europa build
tool not to require that all features be listed in site.xml. I will send
email to the list after I have done that so that any project who wishes
to modify their portion of the site.xml may do so. Please do not modify
the Europa site.xml until after I have fixed the Europa build tool. Thanks.

Jeff McAffer wrote: 

Just to clarify something, to have a feature be available an installable
from an update site it does NOT have to be listed in the site.xml.  The
site.xml is used to show users what is available for them to select and
download.  Depending on the workflow the features that are used by
other projects could be put on the Europa site but not in the site.xml.
 People should then be able to tell update manager to get the required
features as well.  Of course, there may well be a reality issue blocking
this theory... 

Jeff _______________________________________________
cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev
_______________________________________________
eclipse.org-planning-council mailing list
eclipse.org-planning-council@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse.org-planning-council
_______________________________________________
eclipse.org-planning-council mailing list
eclipse.org-planning-council@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse.org-planning-council