|Re: Building non-Eclipse things with b3 [message #578110 is a reply to message #578077]
||Sat, 26 September 2009 09:39
|| Thomas Hallgren
Registered: July 2009
I think it's essential that the models that we now create can cover all sorts of use-cases. As with P2, the objective
with B3 is to be generic. It's not supposed to be bound to OSGi or even to Java.
P2's initial objective was to replace the old update manager so they focused on the use-cases involving features and
bundles first. In some respect, perhaps they were too focused, but on the other hand, it gave the project the traction
it needed to become successful. I think we can learn two lessons from that; The first being that it is extremely
important to think it all trough, both in breadth and in depth, before the implementation starts (and not focus on PDE
during that phase). The second is that we should start with the use-cases that will give us the most traction. It's my
belief that we will do that by focusing on the PDE build as the first candidate. It is a complex use-case with many
demands not seen elsewhere which is good. One thing to be extra careful about when the implementation starts is that the
core must be kept generic. The first phase is supposed to give us the design/architecture that asserts that.
On 09/26/2009 11:01 AM, Oisin Hurley wrote:
> Is it a design goal that the b3 'core' should be able to build all sorts
> of gear, including banging together non-Eclipse and non-OSGi artifacts
> to create simple deliverables like JAR files? Looking at the models, I
> think that this is on the table - which makes me think that there should
> be some concrete use-cases that can serve as tests for success.
> Perhaps it's more urgent to be the PDE build successor and get that
> sorted out before reaching for more general goals...
Powered by FUDForum
. Page generated in 0.04903 seconds