Hi Fredrik
Extensions and services are complementary. In p2 we chose to use
services to interconnect the logical components of the system (and in
the future help with their replaceability) and extensions when we
needed pluggability (e.g. repository types, touchpoints, GC root sets,
etc.). This is very much in line with how we've done things in the past
in Eclipse.
I don't want to go down the path of extensions vs services, as this has
been covered by various articles, but I would like to emphasize that
"extension/extension points" are as OSGi-y as anything else and the
extension registry is usable in other OSGi frameworks. They are just
another way to compose your system.
As for the singleton nature of the TouchpointManager, it is just
lazynsess, convenience. Could you elaborate on the use-case requiring
it to be non-singleton?
HTH,
PaScaL
"Fredrik
Alströmer" ---06/13/2008 05:27:52 AM---Hi people, I've been digging
through the source code of p2 a bit, and I'm a little bit
Hi people,
I've been digging through the source code of p2 a bit, and I'm a little
bit confused by the inhomogeneous use of extensions (touchpoints) and
services (pretty much everything else as far as I can tell). Why can't
the touchpoints simply be OSGi services? The reason I'm asking is that
I'm trying to figure out if it would be possible to use equinox p2 in a
more OSGi-y environment (perhaps with a different OSGi framework).
I'm also a little bit confused by the TouchpointManager singleton, is
that really necessary (the singleton, I mean)? or is that somehow a
logical consequence when using extensions?
Does that make sense at all? :)
Thanks,
Fredrik.
_______________________________________________
equinox-dev mailing list
equinox-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev
_______________________________________________
equinox-dev mailing list
equinox-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev