I would think the extension points should be treated just like other API. Meaning, deprecate for one release cycle and then remove in the next. I think especially if adopter scans show no one is using the extension points and it has already been deprecated, then I would claim that would be a good candidate for removal.
If there's reasons for some of these extension points to hang around, then that's fine, but the component leads should at least make this effort to do the inspection. Thanks, John Lanuti IBM Web Tools Platform Technical Lead, IBM Rational IBM Software Lab - Research Triangle Park, NC [EMAIL PROTECTED] t/l 441-7861 Keith Chong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 01/19/2007 12:52 PM Please respond to "General discussion of project-wide or architectural issues." <[email protected]> To [email protected] cc Subject RE: [wtp-dev] Unused and Misused WTP Extension Points The following extension points are deprecated but haven't been removed. org.eclipse.wst.wsdl.ui.ExtensionsSchemasDescription org.eclipse.wst.wsdl.ui.WSDLEditorExtensionConfiguration org.eclipse.wst.xsd.ui.ExtensionsSchemasDescription org.eclipse.wst.xsd.ui.XSDEditorExtensionConfiguration org.eclipse.wst.xsd.ui.internalEditorConfiguration The following extension point will be used by an adopter org.eclipse.wst.xsd.ui.extensionCategories Regards, Keith "Konstantin Komissarchik" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 19/01/2007 12:05 PM Please respond to "General discussion of project-wide or architectural issues." <[email protected]> To "General discussion of project-wide or architectural issues." <[email protected]> cc Subject RE: [wtp-dev] Unused and Misused WTP Extension Points 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/combinedExtPtUsage.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 _______________________________________________ wtp-dev mailing list [email protected] https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/wtp-dev
_______________________________________________ wtp-dev mailing list [email protected] https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/wtp-dev
