[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
|
Re: [ecf-dev] org.eclipse.ecf.presence.IFQID
|
Hi Scott,
I'm thinking of a new use case where all user resources are
grouped to an e.g. 'IResourceGroup' object rather than displaying
all user/resource-objects at the same level. To be more precise if
a user connects to a server several times (with different
resources) this user or the resource could be assigned to an
IResourceGroup which will be used in a tree as a node (similar to
the use case where users are assigned to groups).
Could this potentially use the platform resource API? i.e. The
resource API has IFolder and IProject (with super interface
IContainer...not the ECF IContainer but the
org.eclipse.core.resources.IContainer).
I rather meant the resources we've added to the XMPP-IDs. By now all
users are displayed at the same level in a group (within the roster
tree in a GUI). But if a user logs in several times it might be
useful to group this user/resource pairs in a new node. This could be
done by using something like an IResourceGroup.
I've also received the updates regarding "multiple users after log in
and log out". I will test these changes by the end of the week and
give you some feedback. Thanks for this update and your work!
Cheers,
Eugen
Am 24.11.2008 um 21:46 schrieb Scott Lewis:
Hi Eugen,
Sorry about the delayed response. I was at ESE and I sort of lost
track of this posting. My apologies.
Eugen Reiswich wrote:
Hi Scott,
I'm thinking of a new use case where all user resources are
grouped to an e.g. 'IResourceGroup' object rather than displaying
all user/resource-objects at the same level. To be more precise if
a user connects to a server several times (with different
resources) this user or the resource could be assigned to an
IResourceGroup which will be used in a tree as a node (similar to
the use case where users are assigned to groups).
Could this potentially use the platform resource API? i.e. The
resource API has IFolder and IProject (with super interface
IContainer...not the ECF IContainer but the
org.eclipse.core.resources.IContainer).
Do you think this is important enough to become part of ECF or
should I handle this just within my project?
The whole interaction between ECF/distribution and the Eclipse
local resources system (and EFS) is extremely important for ECF as
a whole. There are several enhancement requests that are related
to this issue...e.g.: https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?
id=239048. Note that using ECF would allow several/many existing
UIs to work unmodified...e.g. navigator, wtp project browser, etc.
In short, we need to figure out how to replicate multiple resources
into the workspace...for shared editing, but also for lots of other
things (e.g. folders and recursive contents, projects, whole
workspaces potentially). There are some very tricky questions, IMHO:
1) Should we try to use EFS to provide transparent access to
replicated workspace contents?
2) When should we do the replication? 3) How should we decide how
much to replicate...or leave to user (e.g. projects, folders,
individual resources, what's is shared via repository).
4) How/what should we do WRT source code repositories? (e.g. SVN,
CVS, others). That is, how should we deal with cases like: repo
has one content, shared editing initiator has some other version,
and the receiver(s) have yet a third version/or nth version?
5) How to keep local caches of resources consistent enough for use
cases?
I'm quite sure there are very good answers to all these questions,
given some use cases, and I do think that now ECF has the tools
(e.g. with remote services, datashare, etc) to address these
issues. But I wanted to get them out there for everyone to consider.
So to summarize, I do think that your area of work here (i.e.
relationship to local and distributed resources) is important
enough to be directly related to ECF...and it would be great if we
could have ECF community benefit from such work.
Thanks,
Scott
Cheers,
Eugen
Am 02.11.2008 um 21:29 schrieb Scott Lewis:
Hi Eugen,
Eugen Reiswich wrote:
Hi Scott,
obviously I'm not the only one who's working on sunday :) I've
tried your new solution with the IFQID and it looks great!!! I
will have a deep look at it during the week and check out
whether the remote services are working properly with user/
resource pairs, but my first impression is that it works pretty
good. Thanks Scott!
No problem. Just keep those use cases coming. Also Eugen...I
need to hook up with you directly about work I've been doing on
remote mgmt...using p2 and ECF remote services. If you are
available please let me know directly when we could chat via
Skype, etc.
You should not have to specify this property any longer:
props.put(Constants.SERVICE_REGISTRATION_TARGETS, targetIDs);
What is the right way to register remote services, just provide
empty Dictionary<?> parameters?
Yes. Now that the 'on-demand' access to IRemoteServices is
available (via getRemoteServiceReferences), it should be
unnecessary to actually specify service registration targets on
the service host as per above.
Thanks,
Scott
_______________________________________________
ecf-dev mailing list
ecf-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ecf-dev
_______________________________________________
ecf-dev mailing list
ecf-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ecf-dev
_______________________________________________
ecf-dev mailing list
ecf-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ecf-dev
