[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
|
RE: [gef-dev] Common Command Infrastructure
|
IMHO this looks like the best way to
go.
CU, Gunnar
The most likely thing to happen is
to keep using GEF commands and provide a CommandStack implementation which
wraps command in an operation, and delegates to an operation history instance.
This was technically possible for 3.1, but we didn't feel that the
operation framework was stable enough during the 3.1 dev cycle to spend time
working on this type of bridge.
What do you think of this type of solution? If any clients are
already implementing such a command stack on top of 3.1, we would appreciate
the contributino.
-Randy
Pratik
Shah/Durham/IBM@IBMUS
Sent
by: gef-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
06/09/2005 10:01 AM
|
Please respond
to
GEF development |
|
|
To
| GEF development
<gef-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
|
|
cc
| gef-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx,
gef-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
|
|
Subject
| Re: [gef-dev] Common
Command Infrastructure |
|
Gunnar,
We will be considering it for 3.2. However,
since we have to maintain backward-compatibility, we can't just dump our
current method. Unless we find a suitable common ground, this probably
won't happen for 3.2. We'll keep the community updated on this
issue.
Pratik
Shah
Graphical Editing Framework (GEF)
http://www.eclipse.org/gef
Ph:
(919) 254-5043
Fx: (919) 254-8169
"Gunnar Wagenknecht"
<G.Wagenknecht@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent by:
gef-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
06/09/2005 01:58 AM
|
Please respond
to
GEF development |
|
|
To
| <gef-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
|
|
cc
|
|
|
Subject
| [gef-dev] Common
Command Infrastructure |
|
Hi!
Is the GEF team planning
to adopt the new commond command infrastructure
in 3.2?
Cu,
Gunnar
_______________________________________________
gef-dev
mailing
list
gef-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/gef-dev
_______________________________________________
gef-dev mailing
list
gef-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/gef-dev
