The disadvantage is usability. Right now you get equinox and run with -console and its all good. If we break it out you'll have to get two bundles and make sure that the console bundle is started...
We have thought about shipping two setups, one with the console and one without. That might work but we need to consider consumer confusion (which one do I get, which one do I have, ...) and the work required to setup/maintain the build. Perhaps the new starter kit direction we've been exploring could offer some help... Anyway, there is a lot of pressure to improve ease of use so we need to keep that in mind through these changes. Jeff On 2010-12-01, at 6:02 PM, Alex Blewitt wrote: > On 1 Dec 2010, at 22:06, Thomas Watson wrote: > >> There have been various discussions about replacing our framework console >> with something a bit more functional and flexible like apache gogo [1]. At >> this point in the Indigo release we do not plan to remove our own console >> for the Indigo release. Instead we will do what ever is required to enable >> the use of gogo on top of Equinox. We would like to use the incubator to >> allow this effort to mature and then re-evaluate the complete removal of our >> built-in framework console in a later release. Lazar Kirchev from SAP has >> been doing various experiments and investigations in this area. My hope is >> that Lazar will soon be in a position to contribute this work to the equinox >> incubator so that others can try it out on top of Indigo. >> >> Tom >> >> [1] https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=317827 >> > One other advantage would be in slimming down Equinox by providing the > console in a separate bundle from the main OSGi runtime. > > Alex > _______________________________________________ > equinox-dev mailing list > [email protected] > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev
_______________________________________________ equinox-dev mailing list [email protected] https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev
