Hi Michael,
sounds good. For which date do you plan the package name
refactoring?
Regarding third party plugins installing in other products (no pror
standalone): Since, the RMF update site contains also older
versions, and if the version dependency is set correct by the
plugins, there should be no problem. However, third party plugins
need to be adapted for installing them into pror standalone, of
course.
Best regards,
Lukas
Am 26.10.2012 09:22, schrieb Michael
Jastram:
Hi all,
This is a heads-up that I am about to do some significant package
name refactoring. In a nutshell, all appearances of
...pror.reqif10... will be replaced with ...reqif10.pror...
Here some background: Currently, the ProR ItemProviders cannot be
generated without errors, as for this to work, the model classes
and ItemProvider classes must have the same package names (short
of the trailing .provider). It had been in the back of my mind to
create a custom template to fix this.
However, I discussed that with Stephan Eberle at EclipseCon, where
he pointed out that the trailing .provider can be modified through
the generator. For instance, .provider can simply be changed into
.pror.provider, to give the providers a different package name.
This seems to be a much more elegant solution, as it does not
require custom templates. But for this to work, the beginning of
the package names for model and providers must still be
identical. By switching .pror and .reqif, we can achieve this.
I plan on releasing this with 0.5.0. Please be aware that this
will affect ALL presentations (including those not hosted at
eclipse.org). Also, this may break the Hudson system, as Lukas,
who usually maintains it, is on vacation for a few days.
Best,
- Michael
_______________________________________________
rmf-dev mailing list
rmf-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
http://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/rmf-dev
|