RE: [mylar-dev] About feature dependencies in Mylar packaging ....

["Mik Kersten" <beatmik@xxxxxxx>]

I agree with all of your points Philippe, and we've had a bug open on this
for a while:

137826: ensure mylar plug-ins are not loaded on incompatible version
https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=137826

I assume that you additionally want to remove the dependency of
org.eclipse.mylar-feature on the 3.x.x version of the org.eclipse.platform
feature?  That seems fine with me, but it would be good to ensure that the
Update Manager fails to install Mylar into the wrong version of Eclipse,
because we've had quite a few people point 3.2 at the 3.1 update site and
vice-versa.  As the above bug indicates that still wasn't enough to prevent
some from installing the wrong version and until the dependencies are
specified at the plug-in level the incompatible version will still get
loaded.

It would be great if you could provide a patch for this on the above bug,
but please first propose how you plan on specifying the dependencies in case
that triggers some memories of update manager weirdness for me ;)

Mik

> -----Original Message-----
> From: mylar-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:mylar-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx]
> On Behalf Of Philippe Ombredanne
> Sent: Friday, June 23, 2006 1:25 PM
> To: 'Mylar developer discussions'
> Subject: [mylar-dev] About feature dependencies in Mylar packaging ....
> 
> Hi,
> I have a question regarding the way Mylar features express dependencies
> towards other features like the platform, or Jira features.
> Generally by doing that you assume that the bundles you depend on will
> always be packaged in a certain way, when in fact they could be packaged
> differently. In that case this will make the installation of the plugins
> impossible, even though each plugin can still be resolved.
> For instance, in the case of my project EasyEclipse, we create new
> features which are not the original SDK features.
> Hence the vanilla Mylar cannot be installed on top of EasyEclipse
> because of those dependencies.
> 
> IMHO, it is generally better to express only plugins dependencies in the
> features to be impervious to the way plugins have been grouped or
> packaged together in features, unless you "include" a feature which you
> would also provide locally.
> It also enables to express finer grained
> dependencies, which is always better I think, as you can limit those to
> the
> strict minimum; in contrast features are coarse grained, group s of
> plugin made for the ease of packaging.
> In the end the resolution of the plugins is what counts and what makes a
> certain version of Mylar work, while the resolution of the feature is
> less important, and is only an artifice of the update manager, and an
> odd legacy of Eclipse version 2.0 on many counts.
> Note that the versioning guideline for Eclipse 3.2 explicitely commnet
> on that topic of included and required features:
> http://wiki.eclipse.org/index.php/Version_Numbering#Versioning_features
> 
> If agreed, I could provide a simple patch to change that (after thorough
> testing of course).
> What do you think?
> Cordially
> 
> 
> 
> --
> Cheers
> Philippe
> 
> philippe ombredanne | 1 650 799 0949 | pombredanne at nexb.com
> nexB - Open by Design (tm) - http://www.nexb.com
> http://EasyEclipse.org  -  #easyeclipse@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> mylar-dev mailing list
> mylar-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/mylar-dev