Eclipse Community Forums
Forum Search:

Search      Help    Register    Login    Home
Home » Eclipse Projects » Web Tools Project (WTP) » 1.5.1 and eclipse 3.3 M1
1.5.1 and eclipse 3.3 M1 [message #176944] Mon, 14 August 2006 12:53 Go to next message
Zohar Amir is currently offline Zohar Amir
Messages: 419
Registered: July 2009
Senior Member
Can WTP 1.5.1 (wtp-M-1.5.1-200608110237.zip) work with eclipse 3.3 M1?
Re: 1.5.1 and eclipse 3.3 M1 [message #176970 is a reply to message #176944] Mon, 14 August 2006 16:24 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Eugene Kuleshov is currently offline Eugene Kuleshov
Messages: 505
Registered: July 2009
Senior Member
It looks like update site does not allow to install WTP on Eclipse
3.3M1 complaining about some platform dependencies. However after I
installed WTP manually it does not work either.
I suspect that one of WTP plugins has strict version restriction on
one of the platform plugins (perhaps missing "+" or has version range up
to 3.2 or something).

This is quite sad because 3.3M1 haven't introduced any API
incompatibilities yet...
I opened issue for this
https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=153752

regards,
Eugene


Zohar wrote:
> Can WTP 1.5.1 (wtp-M-1.5.1-200608110237.zip) work with eclipse 3.3 M1?
Re: 1.5.1 and eclipse 3.3 M1 [message #177696 is a reply to message #176970] Tue, 22 August 2006 16:34 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Eclipse User
Originally posted by: joerg.von.frantzius.artnology.nospam.com

Out of curiosity, does anybody per chance know why WTP is explicitly
restricted to Eclipse versions 3.2 up to but not including 3.3.0? (see
also my comments on the bug). That's not the update site, but WTP
itself, I think.

Regards,
Jörg

Eugene Kuleshov schrieb:
>
> It looks like update site does not allow to install WTP on Eclipse
> 3.3M1 complaining about some platform dependencies. However after I
> installed WTP manually it does not work either.
> I suspect that one of WTP plugins has strict version restriction on
> one of the platform plugins (perhaps missing "+" or has version range
> up to 3.2 or something).
>
> This is quite sad because 3.3M1 haven't introduced any API
> incompatibilities yet...
> I opened issue for this
> https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=153752
>
> regards,
> Eugene
>
>
> Zohar wrote:
>> Can WTP 1.5.1 (wtp-M-1.5.1-200608110237.zip) work with eclipse 3.3 M1?
Re: 1.5.1 and eclipse 3.3 M1 [message #177702 is a reply to message #177696] Tue, 22 August 2006 16:44 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Eclipse User
Originally posted by: merks.ca.ibm.com

Joerg,

See
http://dev.eclipse.org/mhonarc/lists/cross-project-issues-de v/msg00578.html


Joerg von Frantzius wrote:
> Out of curiosity, does anybody per chance know why WTP is explicitly
> restricted to Eclipse versions 3.2 up to but not including 3.3.0? (see
> also my comments on the bug). That's not the update site, but WTP
> itself, I think.
>
> Regards,
> Jörg
>
> Eugene Kuleshov schrieb:
>>
>> It looks like update site does not allow to install WTP on Eclipse
>> 3.3M1 complaining about some platform dependencies. However after I
>> installed WTP manually it does not work either.
>> I suspect that one of WTP plugins has strict version restriction on
>> one of the platform plugins (perhaps missing "+" or has version range
>> up to 3.2 or something).
>>
>> This is quite sad because 3.3M1 haven't introduced any API
>> incompatibilities yet...
>> I opened issue for this
>> https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=153752
>>
>> regards,
>> Eugene
>>
>>
>> Zohar wrote:
>>> Can WTP 1.5.1 (wtp-M-1.5.1-200608110237.zip) work with eclipse 3.3 M1?
Re: 1.5.1 and eclipse 3.3 M1 [message #177724 is a reply to message #177702] Tue, 22 August 2006 19:02 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Eugene Kuleshov is currently offline Eugene Kuleshov
Messages: 505
Registered: July 2009
Senior Member
This is kinda weird. I can probably understand your concern from the
QA and support point of view. But from usability point of view, why
don't allow users to deal with this?

So, if somebody would want to run on unsupported configuration he on
his own and this is ok. You'll get early notifications/bug reports about
incompatibilities and can deal with them.

That would save some work to WTP and eliminate need in some
intermediate releases when platform API in fact haven't changed...

regards,
Eugene


Ed Merks wrote:
> Joerg,
>
> See
> http://dev.eclipse.org/mhonarc/lists/cross-project-issues-de v/msg00578.html
>
>
>
> Joerg von Frantzius wrote:
>> Out of curiosity, does anybody per chance know why WTP is explicitly
>> restricted to Eclipse versions 3.2 up to but not including 3.3.0?
>> (see also my comments on the bug). That's not the update site, but
>> WTP itself, I think.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Jörg
>>
>> Eugene Kuleshov schrieb:
>>>
>>> It looks like update site does not allow to install WTP on Eclipse
>>> 3.3M1 complaining about some platform dependencies. However after I
>>> installed WTP manually it does not work either.
>>> I suspect that one of WTP plugins has strict version restriction on
>>> one of the platform plugins (perhaps missing "+" or has version
>>> range up to 3.2 or something).
>>>
>>> This is quite sad because 3.3M1 haven't introduced any API
>>> incompatibilities yet...
>>> I opened issue for this
>>> https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=153752
>>>
>>> regards,
>>> Eugene
>>>
>>>
>>> Zohar wrote:
>>>> Can WTP 1.5.1 (wtp-M-1.5.1-200608110237.zip) work with eclipse 3.3 M1?
Re: 1.5.1 and eclipse 3.3 M1 [message #177732 is a reply to message #177724] Tue, 22 August 2006 19:19 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Eclipse User
Originally posted by: merks.ca.ibm.com

Eugene,

It's not actually my opinion. My personal opinion is earlier in that
thread (where I questioned the value of putting an arbitrary upper limit
ahead of knowing what the limit should really be). I.e., I mostly agree
with you. However, Tim does raise a good point that I hadn't
considered, i.e., internal implementations are much more likely to change...


Eugene Kuleshov wrote:
>
> This is kinda weird. I can probably understand your concern from the
> QA and support point of view. But from usability point of view, why
> don't allow users to deal with this?
>
> So, if somebody would want to run on unsupported configuration he on
> his own and this is ok. You'll get early notifications/bug reports
> about incompatibilities and can deal with them.
>
> That would save some work to WTP and eliminate need in some
> intermediate releases when platform API in fact haven't changed...
>
> regards,
> Eugene
>
>
> Ed Merks wrote:
>> Joerg,
>>
>> See
>> http://dev.eclipse.org/mhonarc/lists/cross-project-issues-de v/msg00578.html
>>
>>
>>
>> Joerg von Frantzius wrote:
>>> Out of curiosity, does anybody per chance know why WTP is explicitly
>>> restricted to Eclipse versions 3.2 up to but not including 3.3.0?
>>> (see also my comments on the bug). That's not the update site, but
>>> WTP itself, I think.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Jörg
>>>
>>> Eugene Kuleshov schrieb:
>>>>
>>>> It looks like update site does not allow to install WTP on Eclipse
>>>> 3.3M1 complaining about some platform dependencies. However after I
>>>> installed WTP manually it does not work either.
>>>> I suspect that one of WTP plugins has strict version restriction
>>>> on one of the platform plugins (perhaps missing "+" or has version
>>>> range up to 3.2 or something).
>>>>
>>>> This is quite sad because 3.3M1 haven't introduced any API
>>>> incompatibilities yet...
>>>> I opened issue for this
>>>> https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=153752
>>>>
>>>> regards,
>>>> Eugene
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Zohar wrote:
>>>>> Can WTP 1.5.1 (wtp-M-1.5.1-200608110237.zip) work with eclipse 3.3
>>>>> M1?
Re: 1.5.1 and eclipse 3.3 M1 [message #177739 is a reply to message #177732] Tue, 22 August 2006 19:49 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Eugene Kuleshov is currently offline Eugene Kuleshov
Messages: 505
Registered: July 2009
Senior Member
Tim would definitely know better what part of the internal platform
API WTP depends on. What I don't understand is his the assumption that
internal API will definetely change.

---
Unfortunately, WTP has several places where we rely on internal (not
API) methods from the base…so in general, “loose” numbers really are
wrong, because the base can and does change those methods and “breaks”
WTP. Ultimately of course the answer is to eliminate non-API use and
then the upper bound could in principle be left unset, but it’s hard to
see a path to that point for a project as broad as WTP, where there’s
always some area that is always at the very edge of platform services.
---

I still think that users should have option to deal with this on
their own.

For example, somebody can create a fragment plugin that would "patch"
wtp stuff for changed internal API. That patch would of course have
stronger requirements for dependencies, but it only has to include wtp
classes that are affected by such change, so users won't have to
reinstall the whole wtp.
Note that this patch feature is in fact supported by platform update
manager and allows to distribute these patches from regular update sites.

regards,
Eugene


Ed Merks wrote:
> Eugene,
>
> It's not actually my opinion. My personal opinion is earlier in that
> thread (where I questioned the value of putting an arbitrary upper limit
> ahead of knowing what the limit should really be). I.e., I mostly agree
> with you. However, Tim does raise a good point that I hadn't
> considered, i.e., internal implementations are much more likely to
> change...
>
>
> Eugene Kuleshov wrote:
>>
>> This is kinda weird. I can probably understand your concern from the
>> QA and support point of view. But from usability point of view, why
>> don't allow users to deal with this?
>>
>> So, if somebody would want to run on unsupported configuration he on
>> his own and this is ok. You'll get early notifications/bug reports
>> about incompatibilities and can deal with them.
>>
>> That would save some work to WTP and eliminate need in some
>> intermediate releases when platform API in fact haven't changed...
>>
>> regards,
>> Eugene
>>
>>
>> Ed Merks wrote:
>>> Joerg,
>>>
>>> See
>>> http://dev.eclipse.org/mhonarc/lists/cross-project-issues-de v/msg00578.html
Re: 1.5.1 and eclipse 3.3 M1 [message #177746 is a reply to message #177702] Wed, 23 August 2006 10:02 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Eclipse User
Originally posted by: joerg.von.frantzius.artnology.nospam.com

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------050305010602040503000309
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

Thanks Ed for the link, that's an interesting discussion.

What about allowing the adventurous user to ignore version
incompatibilites, as Ed Burnette suggeste, maybe on a per-feature basis?
There is e.g. https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=78381 but
I'm not sure whether Platform/Update is the right place for this one
(and it had been ignored so far).

What about showing a yellow exclamation mark next to such a feature in
the "Product Configuration" window?

Regards,
J
Re: 1.5.1 and eclipse 3.3 M1 [message #177754 is a reply to message #177746] Wed, 23 August 2006 12:10 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Eclipse User
Originally posted by: merks.ca.ibm.com

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------040100030201060306070601
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

J
Re: 1.5.1 and eclipse 3.3 M1 [message #177783 is a reply to message #177754] Wed, 23 August 2006 14:30 Go to previous message
Eclipse User
Originally posted by: joerg.von.frantzius.artnology.nospam.com

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------040502020807000205060003
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

Hi Ed,

as I don't know of any other enhancement request in the bugzilla
proposing this flying without safety harness, I'd suggest anyone
interested to cast their votes on the bug
<https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=78381>. If it had e.g.
the votes of /the /Eds, maybe something is going to happen here ;-)

I guess it's a question of the OSGI implementation, so I wonder whether
Platform/Update is the right place for the enhancement request?

Regards,
J
Previous Topic:how to set the font for the javascript editor
Next Topic:About drag and drop on XML design editor
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Sat Oct 25 20:52:43 GMT 2014

Powered by FUDForum. Page generated in 0.02902 seconds
.:: Contact :: Home ::.

Powered by: FUDforum 3.0.2.
Copyright ©2001-2010 FUDforum Bulletin Board Software