Hi,

I never received an answer to this mail, does no one have a opinion on
this? Is anyone still interested in this topic?

Best Regards

Jonas


Am 20.01.2014 19:35, schrieb Jonas Helming:
> Hi,
>
> for me the relavant questions are:
>
> 1. Which bundles to we want to graduate and move?
>
> IMHO, the Application Model Editor and the e4 project wizards would be
> most important and already a huge improvement of the situation.
> Everybody who wants to create a native e4 applications needs this editor.
> Far behind, I would consider th CSS editor, but I think it would be
> acceptable to still install this one.
>
> 2. Where do we want to move it?
>
> Until now, most people mentioned, that the e4 tools should be moved to
> PDE. I personally would prefer to move them to the platform. The
> editor is really closely connected to the platform, it even accesses
> some internal API. The editor must also evolve in parallel to the
> Application Model. Finally I think the developers of the plattform are
> more connected to the tools.
>
> 3. What do we need to do to make this happen?
>
> I think we should identify the shortest path to a good result.
>
> - I don't think it is essential that the editor provides a public API.
> Extending it is a rather advanced use cases. If people extended a
> non-graduated tool in the past, I think they can live with internal
> API or SPI in the future. From an API stability point of view, this
> does not make a difference.
> - We need to check, which bundles must be moved. I am worried most
> about org.eclipse.e4.tools.services,  it contains parts, which are not
> only used by the Application Model editor. So we might need to move
> some things around.
> - We need to define our goals for documentation and test coverage
>
> Finally I do not think this will slow down the evolution of the tools.
> If people want to contribute, they can still do. In turn, I think it
> makes it easier and more visible to create native e4 applications.
>
> What do you think?
>
> Cheers
>
> Jonas
>
> P.S.: Doug, thanks fro pushing this forward, I think an opinion from a
> user point of view is very valuable for this discussion
>
>
>
> Am 20.01.2014 18:18, schrieb Doug Schaefer:
>> These tools are equals to the plugin.xml and *.product editors. Not
>> sure what you are getting at below. I'm pretty sure users who need
>> these tools really don't get it.
>>
>> Doug.
>>
>> From: David M Williams <[email protected]
>> <mailto:[email protected]>>
>> Reply-To: E4 Project developer mailing list <[email protected]
>> <mailto:[email protected]>>
>> Date: Monday, January 20, 2014 at 10:30 AM
>> To: E4 Project developer mailing list <[email protected]
>> <mailto:[email protected]>>
>> Subject: Re: [e4-dev] e4 tools build moving to Luna?
>>
>> Sorry if this is obvious to others, but is this tool intended to be a
>> "delivery" of the "e4/sdk" product? In the sense it has APIs and/or
>> could be extended? Or it is intended for use only by "Eclipse
>> committers" in making Eclipse IDE?
>>
>> I ask since the "requirements" are quite a bit different for the two.
>> If simply a "releng tool" it could be provided similar to how we
>> deliver the "releng tools" from Platform (which provides copyright
>> tools, and a validator for MANIFEST and POM versions (and some old
>> cvs 'release' tools not used much these days). While the description
>> is needs improvement, I think it's pretty clear it is not intended to
>> provide API or be extended (therefore "compatibility", etc. is not
>> considered that important ... we tell people to use the same version
>> built with their dev. environment.
>>
>> But, if meant to be extendable, and provide API, etc, then there are
>> higher criteria.
>>
>> I should add, it would be "hard" to "build with the SDK" because it
>> depends on some emf components (such as emf.edit.ui?) which is not
>> apart of the "base" EMF we get "early" from EMF.
>>
>> Hope these comments help inform the final decision.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> From:        John Arthorne <[email protected]
>> <mailto:[email protected]>>
>> To:        E4 Project developer mailing list <[email protected]
>> <mailto:[email protected]>>,
>> Date:        01/19/2014 11:11 AM
>> Subject:        Re: [e4-dev] e4 tools build moving to Luna?
>> Sent by:        [email protected]
>> <mailto:[email protected]>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>
>>
>> If  parts of the e4 tools graduated into PDE, then all active
>> contributors to those tools would be granted PDE commit rights as
>> part of the graduation/restructuring. We did the same thing with
>> commit rights on other parts of e4 that graduated into the platform.
>> So I don't think commit rights will be a problem at all. It does of
>> course require active committers to keep maintaining it wherever it
>> ends up.
>>
>> John
>>
>>
>>
>> From:        Lars Vogel <[email protected]
>> <mailto:[email protected]>>
>> To:        E4 Project developer mailing list <[email protected]
>> <mailto:[email protected]>>,
>> Date:        01/18/2014 05:02 AM
>> Subject:        Re: [e4-dev] e4 tools build moving to Luna?
>> Sent by:        [email protected]
>> <mailto:[email protected]>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>
>>
>> I personally like that we can adjust the tooling as needed. PDE seems
>> very inactive at the moment.
>>
>> But test, better Javadoc and fixing the outstanding bugs is good in
>> general, no matter if the tools get officially released or not, so no
>> need to hold such activities of.
>>
>> Best regards, Lars
>>
>> Am 18.01.2014 09:40 schrieb "Wim Jongman" <[email protected]_
>> <mailto:[email protected]>>:
>> There are things missing in the model editor and in the tooling in
>> general. Most notably unit tests, javadoc and user documentation. We
>> need to fix these before a release can be considered.  
>>
>> I am also happy to join a dedicated team that tackles this. So that
>> makes two. Who wants to join us?
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Wim
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> e4-dev mailing list_
>> [email protected]_ <mailto:[email protected]>_
>> __https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/e4-dev_
>> _______________________________________________
>> e4-dev mailing list
>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>_
>> __https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/e4-dev_
>> _______________________________________________
>> e4-dev mailing list
>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/e4-dev
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> e4-dev mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/e4-dev
>

_______________________________________________
e4-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/e4-dev

Reply via email to