At least one of these extension points (org.eclipse.wst.common.project.facet.ui.wizard) is there for backwards compatibility. This particular one was introduced in 1.0 and deprecated/replaced in 1.5. So what should our policy be with regards to such deprecated extension points (and api for that matter)? Do we say that they get removed when they no longer come up in usage scans? - Konstantin
________________________________ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John Lanuti Sent: Friday, January 19, 2007 8:58 AM To: [email protected] Subject: [wtp-dev] Unused and Misused WTP Extension Points Take a look at the Extension Point Usage Scan Report: http://www.eclipse.org/webtools/development/apiscanner/reports/combinedE xtPtUsage.html There, you'll see the extension point usage scans for two of our largest adopters, IBM and BEA, as well as any extension point usages within WTP. This report is interesting for two reasons: (1) It may be worthwhile for us to design a mechanism, maybe using the component.xml, to declare extension points as API or as internal. We have a lot of extension points which only have one reference within WTP, and it is probably debateable whether an extension point was the best solution there anyways. It could be argued all extension points should be API by definition, but I know as a project, that's not how we're using them. We have too many extension points with one internal reference for that to be the case. I am especially thinking of those only used for classloading purposes. (2) There are a number of extension points which aren't being used at all. This is very alarming, and we should remove/clean these up for sure. Extension points not being used: org.eclipse.wst.common.emfworkbench.integration.ModifierHelperFactory org.eclipse.wst.common.frameworks.ui.DataModelWizardExtension org.eclipse.wst.common.frameworks.ui.extendedViewer org.eclipse.wst.common.project.facet.ui.wizard org.eclipse.wst.common.ui.properties.propertySections org.eclipse.wst.validation.referencialFileValidator org.eclipse.jst.j2ee.J2EEModulePostImport org.eclipse.jst.j2ee.core.jndiBindingsHelpers org.eclipse.jst.server.core.internalRuntimeComponentProviders org.eclipse.wst.internet.monitor.core.internalContentFilters org.eclipse.wst.server.core.installableRuntimes org.eclipse.wst.wsdl.ui.ExtensionsSchemasDescription org.eclipse.wst.wsdl.ui.WSDLEditorExtensionConfiguration org.eclipse.wst.html.ui.deviceProfileEntryProvider org.eclipse.wst.xsd.ui.ExtensionsSchemasDescription org.eclipse.wst.xsd.ui.XSDEditorExtensionConfiguration org.eclipse.wst.xsd.ui.extensionCategories org.eclipse.wst.xsd.ui.internalEditorConfiguration I can start opening defects for these unused extension points if you like. Thoughts? John Lanuti IBM Web Tools Platform Technical Lead, IBM Rational IBM Software Lab - Research Triangle Park, NC [EMAIL PROTECTED] t/l 441-7861 _______________________________________________________________________ Notice: This email message, together with any attachments, may contain information of BEA Systems, Inc., its subsidiaries and affiliated entities, that may be confidential, proprietary, copyrighted and/or legally privileged, and is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity named in this message. If you are not the intended recipient, and have received this message in error, please immediately return this by email and then delete it.
_______________________________________________ wtp-dev mailing list [email protected] https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/wtp-dev
