On Mon, Oct 3, 2011 at 11:16 PM, Andrew Overholt <overh...@redhat.com> wrote: > Hi, > > * Alexander Kurtakov <akurt...@redhat.com> [2011-09-27 12:03]: >> Also note that one can't have the same groupId:artifactId for two >> modules and this is the main problem because a number of our modules are >> having the same feature id and symbolic name for the main bundle. > > Should all of our group IDs be fully-qualified? Could we instead make > them ex. "lttng"? Having something like > org.eclipse.linuxtools:lttng:org.eclipse.linuxtools.lttng.core ?
You can't have two groupId's as in your example. Every artifact is a unique groupId:artifactId tuple, no way to make groupId:groupId:artifactId. > >> Please take care of your modules so the feature id/bundle symbolic name match >> the artifactId. If nothing happens on given module I'll start modifying >> modules on October 10th to fix the build with tycho 0.13 using the following >> rules: > > These rules sound okay to me given the requirements. > > Committers: please fix things yourself so that Alex doesn't have to > make these changes. > >> * if feature and bundle have the same id - I'll rename the feature making it >> $currentName.feature > > Don't forget we'll have to reflect this change in the simultaneous > release b3aggr files and in the EPP feature.xml. Both are referenced on > our releng wiki page. > >> 1. Do we need test features? > > Not anymore. OK, Everyone please remove them or I will do it if they cause a build problem at some time :). > >> 2. Agressive usage of features - There are cases (e.g libhover) where there >> is >> almost a feature for every bundle. Is it really needed? Can we simplify it >> and use features for some bigger grouping? > > I'll let Jeff comment on this. > >> 3. Bundle/Feature naming - that's what provoked this mail, I appreciate the >> fact that tycho devs showed the problem. It's confusing (at least) especially >> in feature.xml files (include vs. import). My suggestion is to make the >> feature >> have the module name (e.g. org.eclipse.linuxtools.changelog) and if there is >> a >> module with the same name rename it to smth that describes it better e.g. >> org.eclipse.linuxtools.changelog.core. Changelog is used intentionally >> because >> it's already this way. > > +1 for clean core/UI separation and clearer bundle names. Note that > bundle re-names will affect consumers just like you mentioned earlier, > Alex, so we should be _very_ careful about such changes. There is no better time to do such thing. Post 1.0 is gonna be too much problem. At least my opinion, Alex > > Andrew > _______________________________________________ > linuxtools-dev mailing list > linuxtools-dev@eclipse.org > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxtools-dev > _______________________________________________ linuxtools-dev mailing list linuxtools-dev@eclipse.org https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxtools-dev
