Home » Eclipse Projects » Oomph » About the Product Catalogue
| About the Product Catalogue [message #1696818] |
Thu, 28 May 2015 13:40  |
Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Hi, Oomphers,
(?)
What "products" are intended to be presented in the Products page of
the Oomph setup wizard (and, therefore, listed in the product
catalogue)? Is it exactly the set of EPP Packages published on
download.eclipse.org? Is there a possibility for including other
packages in this catalogue apart from those that are produced by the
EPP project?
I ask because the Papyrus project has defined an RCP Papyrus workbench
package that isn't an EPP, but which similarly provides a one-stop-shop
for users that want to do UML modeling and such with Papyrus. To
increase the reach of this package, there is interest in making it
available through the Oomph installer, which I think (correct if I'm
wrong) would require adding it to the product catalogue.
I expect that for the next release, Papyrus will negotiate as necessary
to move this package to EPP so that it can just flow naturally through
that channel, but that leaves the question of what can be done in Oomph
for Mars.
Thanks,
Christian
|
|
|
| Re: About the Product Catalogue [message #1696819 is a reply to message #1696818] |
Thu, 28 May 2015 13:54  |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Christian,
Comments below.
On 28/05/2015 7:40 PM, Christian W. Damus wrote:
> Hi, Oomphers,
>
> (?)
>
> What "products" are intended to be presented in the Products page of
> the Oomph setup wizard (and, therefore, listed in the product
> catalogue)? Is it exactly the set of EPP Packages published on
> download.eclipse.org?
Yes, currently the product catalog is generated from the EPP and release
train repositories.
> Is there a possibility for including other packages in this catalogue
> apart from those that are produced by the EPP project?
In theory. Note that there is one additional product, "Eclipse
Platform" that's not from the EPP package. It's the absolute minimal
installation, with no JDT, PDE, or anything else useful...
>
> I ask because the Papyrus project has defined an RCP Papyrus workbench
> package that isn't an EPP, but which similarly provides a
> one-stop-shop for users that want to do UML modeling and such with
> Papyrus. To increase the reach of this package, there is interest in
> making it available through the Oomph installer, which I think
> (correct if I'm wrong) would require adding it to the product catalogue.
Or having additional product catalogs...
>
> I expect that for the next release, Papyrus will negotiate as
> necessary to move this package to EPP so that it can just flow
> naturally through that channel, but that leaves the question of what
> can be done in Oomph for Mars.
I see. Easier for everyone (especially us), if it's an EPP package that
we can simply analyze and generate accordingly...
>
> Thanks,
>
> Christian
>
|
|
|
| Re: About the Product Catalogue [message #1696920 is a reply to message #1696819] |
Fri, 29 May 2015 07:51 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Thanks, Ed.
So, if I understand correctly, it's not so much that the content of the
product catalogue is determined by policy? I am concerned mostly
because of Oomph's positioning now as "the" Eclipse Installer, which
would seem to consumers to make it a creature of the foundation or the
planning council or some such, so that there'd be an expectation that
the "products" it offers are somehow "official".
(I'm not usually in the habit of applying scare quotes so liberally)
Just to be clear, the mechanism of adding a non-EPP package would not
be similar to the addition of projects to the Eclipse.org and
Github.com project catalogues, because the products are generated from
EPP? That is, it wouldn't be as "simple" as submitting a bugzilla with
an URL to a *.setup resource that the Oomph team would review and then
add to the catalogue.
In any case, I think it sounds like we'll all be better off waiting
until this RCP (which is just a POM file someplace that, apparently,
doesn't actually build correctly at the moment) is hosted by EPP with
the processes and tools there to support it.
cW
On 2015-05-28 17:54:37 +0000, Ed Merks said:
> Christian,
>
> Comments below.
>
> On 28/05/2015 7:40 PM, Christian W. Damus wrote:
>> Hi, Oomphers,
>>
>> (?)
>>
>> What "products" are intended to be presented in the Products page of
>> the Oomph setup wizard (and, therefore, listed in the product
>> catalogue)? Is it exactly the set of EPP Packages published on
>> download.eclipse.org?
> Yes, currently the product catalog is generated from the EPP and
> release train repositories.
>> Is there a possibility for including other packages in this catalogue
>> apart from those that are produced by the EPP project?
> In theory. Note that there is one additional product, "Eclipse
> Platform" that's not from the EPP package. It's the absolute minimal
> installation, with no JDT, PDE, or anything else useful...
>>
>> I ask because the Papyrus project has defined an RCP Papyrus workbench
>> package that isn't an EPP, but which similarly provides a one-stop-shop
>> for users that want to do UML modeling and such with Papyrus. To
>> increase the reach of this package, there is interest in making it
>> available through the Oomph installer, which I think (correct if I'm
>> wrong) would require adding it to the product catalogue.
> Or having additional product catalogs...
>>
>> I expect that for the next release, Papyrus will negotiate as necessary
>> to move this package to EPP so that it can just flow naturally through
>> that channel, but that leaves the question of what can be done in Oomph
>> for Mars.
> I see. Easier for everyone (especially us), if it's an EPP package
> that we can simply analyze and generate accordingly...
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Christian
|
|
|
| Re: About the Product Catalogue [message #1696922 is a reply to message #1696920] |
Fri, 29 May 2015 07:59 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Christian,
Comments below.
On 29/05/2015 1:51 PM, Christian W. Damus wrote:
> Thanks, Ed.
>
> So, if I understand correctly, it's not so much that the content of
> the product catalogue is determined by policy?
Well, such things do have a political slant. It is expected that the
product catalog contain the EEP products...
> I am concerned mostly because of Oomph's positioning now as "the"
> Eclipse Installer, which would seem to consumers to make it a creature
> of the foundation or the planning council or some such, so that
> there'd be an expectation that the "products" it offers are somehow
> "official".
Yes.
>
> (I'm not usually in the habit of applying scare quotes so liberally)
>
> Just to be clear, the mechanism of adding a non-EPP package would not
> be similar to the addition of projects to the Eclipse.org and
> Github.com project catalogues, because the products are generated from
> EPP? That is, it wouldn't be as "simple" as submitting a bugzilla
> with an URL to a *.setup resource that the Oomph team would review and
> then add to the catalogue.
No, though just as we have the ability to drop any old project into one
of the two project catalogs, it would certainly be nice to have similar
types of things for product definitions. It's easier with projects
because projects can contain projects so we simply add a "self
generating" project to each project catalog. We could do something
similar with an extension catalog that would allow one to locally add a
product definition to an additional product catalog...
>
> In any case, I think it sounds like we'll all be better off waiting
> until this RCP (which is just a POM file someplace that, apparently,
> doesn't actually build correctly at the moment) is hosted by EPP with
> the processes and tools there to support it.
Yes, though having one separate extensible product catalog would be kind
of cool and useful...
>
> cW
>
>
> On 2015-05-28 17:54:37 +0000, Ed Merks said:
>
>> Christian,
>>
>> Comments below.
>>
>> On 28/05/2015 7:40 PM, Christian W. Damus wrote:
>>> Hi, Oomphers,
>>>
>>> (?)
>>>
>>> What "products" are intended to be presented in the Products page of
>>> the Oomph setup wizard (and, therefore, listed in the product
>>> catalogue)? Is it exactly the set of EPP Packages published on
>>> download.eclipse.org?
>> Yes, currently the product catalog is generated from the EPP and
>> release train repositories.
>>> Is there a possibility for including other packages in this
>>> catalogue apart from those that are produced by the EPP project?
>> In theory. Note that there is one additional product, "Eclipse
>> Platform" that's not from the EPP package. It's the absolute minimal
>> installation, with no JDT, PDE, or anything else useful...
>>>
>>> I ask because the Papyrus project has defined an RCP Papyrus
>>> workbench package that isn't an EPP, but which similarly provides a
>>> one-stop-shop for users that want to do UML modeling and such with
>>> Papyrus. To increase the reach of this package, there is interest
>>> in making it available through the Oomph installer, which I think
>>> (correct if I'm wrong) would require adding it to the product
>>> catalogue.
>> Or having additional product catalogs...
>>>
>>> I expect that for the next release, Papyrus will negotiate as
>>> necessary to move this package to EPP so that it can just flow
>>> naturally through that channel, but that leaves the question of what
>>> can be done in Oomph for Mars.
>> I see. Easier for everyone (especially us), if it's an EPP package
>> that we can simply analyze and generate accordingly...
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Christian
>
>
|
|
|
| Re: About the Product Catalogue [message #1696933 is a reply to message #1696922] |
Fri, 29 May 2015 09:23 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Thanks again, Ed.
I think extensible/customizable product catalogues will be useful
especially for enterprise deployment of Oomph, but obviously wouldn't
be something we can think about for Mars. The Papyrus team will work
on defining an EPP package, which has its own advantages anyways.
Still happily oomphing,
Christian
On 2015-05-29 11:59:23 +0000, Ed Merks said:
> Christian,
>
> Comments below.
>
> On 29/05/2015 1:51 PM, Christian W. Damus wrote:
>> Thanks, Ed.
>>
>> So, if I understand correctly, it's not so much that the content of the
>> product catalogue is determined by policy?
> Well, such things do have a political slant. It is expected that the
> product catalog contain the EEP products...
>> I am concerned mostly because of Oomph's positioning now as "the"
>> Eclipse Installer, which would seem to consumers to make it a creature
>> of the foundation or the planning council or some such, so that there'd
>> be an expectation that the "products" it offers are somehow "official".
> Yes.
>>
>> (I'm not usually in the habit of applying scare quotes so liberally)
>>
>> Just to be clear, the mechanism of adding a non-EPP package would not
>> be similar to the addition of projects to the Eclipse.org and
>> Github.com project catalogues, because the products are generated from
>> EPP? That is, it wouldn't be as "simple" as submitting a bugzilla with
>> an URL to a *.setup resource that the Oomph team would review and then
>> add to the catalogue.
> No, though just as we have the ability to drop any old project into one
> of the two project catalogs, it would certainly be nice to have similar
> types of things for product definitions. It's easier with projects
> because projects can contain projects so we simply add a "self
> generating" project to each project catalog. We could do something
> similar with an extension catalog that would allow one to locally add a
> product definition to an additional product catalog...
>>
>> In any case, I think it sounds like we'll all be better off waiting
>> until this RCP (which is just a POM file someplace that, apparently,
>> doesn't actually build correctly at the moment) is hosted by EPP with
>> the processes and tools there to support it.
> Yes, though having one separate extensible product catalog would be
> kind of cool and useful...
>>
>> cW
>>
>>
>> On 2015-05-28 17:54:37 +0000, Ed Merks said:
>>
>>> Christian,
>>>
>>> Comments below.
>>>
>>> On 28/05/2015 7:40 PM, Christian W. Damus wrote:
>>>> Hi, Oomphers,
>>>>
>>>> (?)
>>>>
>>>> What "products" are intended to be presented in the Products page of
>>>> the Oomph setup wizard (and, therefore, listed in the product
>>>> catalogue)? Is it exactly the set of EPP Packages published on
>>>> download.eclipse.org?
>>> Yes, currently the product catalog is generated from the EPP and
>>> release train repositories.
>>>> Is there a possibility for including other packages in this catalogue
>>>> apart from those that are produced by the EPP project?
>>> In theory. Note that there is one additional product, "Eclipse
>>> Platform" that's not from the EPP package. It's the absolute minimal
>>> installation, with no JDT, PDE, or anything else useful...
>>>>
>>>> I ask because the Papyrus project has defined an RCP Papyrus workbench
>>>> package that isn't an EPP, but which similarly provides a one-stop-shop
>>>> for users that want to do UML modeling and such with Papyrus. To
>>>> increase the reach of this package, there is interest in making it
>>>> available through the Oomph installer, which I think (correct if I'm
>>>> wrong) would require adding it to the product catalogue.
>>> Or having additional product catalogs...
>>>>
>>>> I expect that for the next release, Papyrus will negotiate as necessary
>>>> to move this package to EPP so that it can just flow naturally through
>>>> that channel, but that leaves the question of what can be done in Oomph
>>>> for Mars.
>>> I see. Easier for everyone (especially us), if it's an EPP package
>>> that we can simply analyze and generate accordingly...
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>>
>>>> Christian
|
|
|
| Re: About the Product Catalogue [message #1696944 is a reply to message #1696933] |
Fri, 29 May 2015 12:02 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Christian,
I've been prototyping support for this, because it seems interesting.
It's not so hard. Please open an enhancement request and you can track
progress there...
I have something that actually works already. I'm trying to use it to
install Oomph's installer product. An interesting exercise...
It will also be interesting to prototype your new EEP package this way
and get people to use it before the EPP productization is finished.
On 29/05/2015 3:23 PM, Christian W. Damus wrote:
> Thanks again, Ed.
>
> I think extensible/customizable product catalogues will be useful
> especially for enterprise deployment of Oomph, but obviously wouldn't
> be something we can think about for Mars. The Papyrus team will work
> on defining an EPP package, which has its own advantages anyways.
>
> Still happily oomphing,
>
> Christian
>
>
> On 2015-05-29 11:59:23 +0000, Ed Merks said:
>
>> Christian,
>>
>> Comments below.
>>
>> On 29/05/2015 1:51 PM, Christian W. Damus wrote:
>>> Thanks, Ed.
>>>
>>> So, if I understand correctly, it's not so much that the content of
>>> the product catalogue is determined by policy?
>> Well, such things do have a political slant. It is expected that the
>> product catalog contain the EEP products...
>>> I am concerned mostly because of Oomph's positioning now as "the"
>>> Eclipse Installer, which would seem to consumers to make it a
>>> creature of the foundation or the planning council or some such, so
>>> that there'd be an expectation that the "products" it offers are
>>> somehow "official".
>> Yes.
>>>
>>> (I'm not usually in the habit of applying scare quotes so liberally)
>>>
>>> Just to be clear, the mechanism of adding a non-EPP package would
>>> not be similar to the addition of projects to the Eclipse.org and
>>> Github.com project catalogues, because the products are generated
>>> from EPP? That is, it wouldn't be as "simple" as submitting a
>>> bugzilla with an URL to a *.setup resource that the Oomph team would
>>> review and then add to the catalogue.
>> No, though just as we have the ability to drop any old project into
>> one of the two project catalogs, it would certainly be nice to have
>> similar types of things for product definitions. It's easier with
>> projects because projects can contain projects so we simply add a
>> "self generating" project to each project catalog. We could do
>> something similar with an extension catalog that would allow one to
>> locally add a product definition to an additional product catalog...
>>>
>>> In any case, I think it sounds like we'll all be better off waiting
>>> until this RCP (which is just a POM file someplace that, apparently,
>>> doesn't actually build correctly at the moment) is hosted by EPP
>>> with the processes and tools there to support it.
>> Yes, though having one separate extensible product catalog would be
>> kind of cool and useful...
>>>
>>> cW
>>>
>>>
>>> On 2015-05-28 17:54:37 +0000, Ed Merks said:
>>>
>>>> Christian,
>>>>
>>>> Comments below.
>>>>
>>>> On 28/05/2015 7:40 PM, Christian W. Damus wrote:
>>>>> Hi, Oomphers,
>>>>>
>>>>> (?)
>>>>>
>>>>> What "products" are intended to be presented in the Products page
>>>>> of the Oomph setup wizard (and, therefore, listed in the product
>>>>> catalogue)? Is it exactly the set of EPP Packages published on
>>>>> download.eclipse.org?
>>>> Yes, currently the product catalog is generated from the EPP and
>>>> release train repositories.
>>>>> Is there a possibility for including other packages in this
>>>>> catalogue apart from those that are produced by the EPP project?
>>>> In theory. Note that there is one additional product, "Eclipse
>>>> Platform" that's not from the EPP package. It's the absolute
>>>> minimal installation, with no JDT, PDE, or anything else useful...
>>>>>
>>>>> I ask because the Papyrus project has defined an RCP Papyrus
>>>>> workbench package that isn't an EPP, but which similarly provides
>>>>> a one-stop-shop for users that want to do UML modeling and such
>>>>> with Papyrus. To increase the reach of this package, there is
>>>>> interest in making it available through the Oomph installer, which
>>>>> I think (correct if I'm wrong) would require adding it to the
>>>>> product catalogue.
>>>> Or having additional product catalogs...
>>>>>
>>>>> I expect that for the next release, Papyrus will negotiate as
>>>>> necessary to move this package to EPP so that it can just flow
>>>>> naturally through that channel, but that leaves the question of
>>>>> what can be done in Oomph for Mars.
>>>> I see. Easier for everyone (especially us), if it's an EPP package
>>>> that we can simply analyze and generate accordingly...
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>
>>>>> Christian
>
>
|
|
|
| Re: About the Product Catalogue [message #1697098 is a reply to message #1696944] |
Mon, 01 June 2015 10:21 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Christian,
Note that I've opened
https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=468958 and committed
changes. It won't all work until I add this to the index:
<productCatalog
href="user:/user.products.setup?class='http://www.eclipse.org/oomph/setup/1.0%23//ProductCatalog',name='user.products',label='<User
Products>',description='A container catalog for local user-defined
products'#/"/>
I'm holding off doing that because
org.eclipse.oomph.setup.internal.core.util.UserURIHandlerImpl.create(URI, URI)
in versions of Oomph before this commit will create a Product instance
instead of a ProductCatalog instance.
Otherwise the new support works well. We've even defined a product for
the Oomph installer product which I've tested...
http://git.eclipse.org/c/oomph/org.eclipse.oomph.git/tree/setups/OomphInstaller.setup
On 29/05/2015 6:02 PM, Ed Merks wrote:
> Christian,
>
> I've been prototyping support for this, because it seems
> interesting. It's not so hard. Please open an enhancement request
> and you can track progress there...
>
> I have something that actually works already. I'm trying to use it to
> install Oomph's installer product. An interesting exercise...
>
> It will also be interesting to prototype your new EEP package this way
> and get people to use it before the EPP productization is finished.
>
>
> On 29/05/2015 3:23 PM, Christian W. Damus wrote:
>> Thanks again, Ed.
>>
>> I think extensible/customizable product catalogues will be useful
>> especially for enterprise deployment of Oomph, but obviously wouldn't
>> be something we can think about for Mars. The Papyrus team will work
>> on defining an EPP package, which has its own advantages anyways.
>>
>> Still happily oomphing,
>>
>> Christian
>>
>>
>> On 2015-05-29 11:59:23 +0000, Ed Merks said:
>>
>>> Christian,
>>>
>>> Comments below.
>>>
>>> On 29/05/2015 1:51 PM, Christian W. Damus wrote:
>>>> Thanks, Ed.
>>>>
>>>> So, if I understand correctly, it's not so much that the content of
>>>> the product catalogue is determined by policy?
>>> Well, such things do have a political slant. It is expected that
>>> the product catalog contain the EEP products...
>>>> I am concerned mostly because of Oomph's positioning now as "the"
>>>> Eclipse Installer, which would seem to consumers to make it a
>>>> creature of the foundation or the planning council or some such, so
>>>> that there'd be an expectation that the "products" it offers are
>>>> somehow "official".
>>> Yes.
>>>>
>>>> (I'm not usually in the habit of applying scare quotes so liberally)
>>>>
>>>> Just to be clear, the mechanism of adding a non-EPP package would
>>>> not be similar to the addition of projects to the Eclipse.org and
>>>> Github.com project catalogues, because the products are generated
>>>> from EPP? That is, it wouldn't be as "simple" as submitting a
>>>> bugzilla with an URL to a *.setup resource that the Oomph team
>>>> would review and then add to the catalogue.
>>> No, though just as we have the ability to drop any old project into
>>> one of the two project catalogs, it would certainly be nice to have
>>> similar types of things for product definitions. It's easier with
>>> projects because projects can contain projects so we simply add a
>>> "self generating" project to each project catalog. We could do
>>> something similar with an extension catalog that would allow one to
>>> locally add a product definition to an additional product catalog...
>>>>
>>>> In any case, I think it sounds like we'll all be better off waiting
>>>> until this RCP (which is just a POM file someplace that,
>>>> apparently, doesn't actually build correctly at the moment) is
>>>> hosted by EPP with the processes and tools there to support it.
>>> Yes, though having one separate extensible product catalog would be
>>> kind of cool and useful...
>>>>
>>>> cW
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 2015-05-28 17:54:37 +0000, Ed Merks said:
>>>>
>>>>> Christian,
>>>>>
>>>>> Comments below.
>>>>>
>>>>> On 28/05/2015 7:40 PM, Christian W. Damus wrote:
>>>>>> Hi, Oomphers,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> (?)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What "products" are intended to be presented in the Products page
>>>>>> of the Oomph setup wizard (and, therefore, listed in the product
>>>>>> catalogue)? Is it exactly the set of EPP Packages published on
>>>>>> download.eclipse.org?
>>>>> Yes, currently the product catalog is generated from the EPP and
>>>>> release train repositories.
>>>>>> Is there a possibility for including other packages in this
>>>>>> catalogue apart from those that are produced by the EPP project?
>>>>> In theory. Note that there is one additional product, "Eclipse
>>>>> Platform" that's not from the EPP package. It's the absolute
>>>>> minimal installation, with no JDT, PDE, or anything else useful...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I ask because the Papyrus project has defined an RCP Papyrus
>>>>>> workbench package that isn't an EPP, but which similarly provides
>>>>>> a one-stop-shop for users that want to do UML modeling and such
>>>>>> with Papyrus. To increase the reach of this package, there is
>>>>>> interest in making it available through the Oomph installer,
>>>>>> which I think (correct if I'm wrong) would require adding it to
>>>>>> the product catalogue.
>>>>> Or having additional product catalogs...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I expect that for the next release, Papyrus will negotiate as
>>>>>> necessary to move this package to EPP so that it can just flow
>>>>>> naturally through that channel, but that leaves the question of
>>>>>> what can be done in Oomph for Mars.
>>>>> I see. Easier for everyone (especially us), if it's an EPP
>>>>> package that we can simply analyze and generate accordingly...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Christian
>>
>>
>
|
|
|
| Re: About the Product Catalogue [message #1697146 is a reply to message #1697098] |
Mon, 01 June 2015 18:13 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Hi, Ed,
Very cool! Thanks for taking such a keen interest in this. I think we
may very well need to rely on it: I'm not sure how many modeling-ish
packages Eclipse will want to provide via EPP. :-)
Let me know if there's something I can do to help with testing or whatever.
Christian
On 2015-06-01 14:21:38 +0000, Ed Merks said:
> Christian,
>
> Note that I've opened
> https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=468958 and committed
> changes. It won't all work until I add this to the index:
>
> <productCatalog
> href="user:/user.products.setup?class='http://www.eclipse.org/oomph/setup/1.0%23//ProductCatalog',name='user.products',label='<User
> Products>',description='A container catalog for local user-defined
> products'#/"/>
>
> I'm holding off doing that because
> org.eclipse.oomph.setup.internal.core.util.UserURIHandlerImpl.create(URI,
> URI) in versions of Oomph before this commit will create a Product
> instance instead of a ProductCatalog instance.
>
> Otherwise the new support works well. We've even defined a product for
> the Oomph installer product which I've tested...
>
> http://git.eclipse.org/c/oomph/org.eclipse.oomph.git/tree/setups/OomphInstaller.setup
>
>
>
>
> On 29/05/2015 6:02 PM, Ed Merks wrote:
>> Christian,
>>
>> I've been prototyping support for this, because it seems interesting.
>> It's not so hard. Please open an enhancement request and you can track
>> progress there...
>>
>> I have something that actually works already. I'm trying to use it to
>> install Oomph's installer product. An interesting exercise...
>>
>> It will also be interesting to prototype your new EEP package this way
>> and get people to use it before the EPP productization is finished.
>>
>>
>> On 29/05/2015 3:23 PM, Christian W. Damus wrote:
>>> Thanks again, Ed.
>>>
>>> I think extensible/customizable product catalogues will be useful
>>> especially for enterprise deployment of Oomph, but obviously wouldn't
>>> be something we can think about for Mars. The Papyrus team will work on
>>> defining an EPP package, which has its own advantages anyways.
>>>
>>> Still happily oomphing,
>>>
>>> Christian
>>>
>>>
>>> On 2015-05-29 11:59:23 +0000, Ed Merks said:
>>>
>>>> Christian,
>>>>
>>>> Comments below.
>>>>
>>>> On 29/05/2015 1:51 PM, Christian W. Damus wrote:
>>>>> Thanks, Ed.
>>>>>
>>>>> So, if I understand correctly, it's not so much that the content of the
>>>>> product catalogue is determined by policy?
>>>> Well, such things do have a political slant. It is expected that the
>>>> product catalog contain the EEP products...
>>>>> I am concerned mostly because of Oomph's positioning now as "the"
>>>>> Eclipse Installer, which would seem to consumers to make it a creature
>>>>> of the foundation or the planning council or some such, so that there'd
>>>>> be an expectation that the "products" it offers are somehow "official".
>>>> Yes.
>>>>>
>>>>> (I'm not usually in the habit of applying scare quotes so liberally)
>>>>>
>>>>> Just to be clear, the mechanism of adding a non-EPP package would not
>>>>> be similar to the addition of projects to the Eclipse.org and
>>>>> Github.com project catalogues, because the products are generated from
>>>>> EPP? That is, it wouldn't be as "simple" as submitting a bugzilla with
>>>>> an URL to a *.setup resource that the Oomph team would review and then
>>>>> add to the catalogue.
>>>> No, though just as we have the ability to drop any old project into one
>>>> of the two project catalogs, it would certainly be nice to have similar
>>>> types of things for product definitions. It's easier with projects
>>>> because projects can contain projects so we simply add a "self
>>>> generating" project to each project catalog. We could do something
>>>> similar with an extension catalog that would allow one to locally add a
>>>> product definition to an additional product catalog...
>>>>>
>>>>> In any case, I think it sounds like we'll all be better off waiting
>>>>> until this RCP (which is just a POM file someplace that, apparently,
>>>>> doesn't actually build correctly at the moment) is hosted by EPP with
>>>>> the processes and tools there to support it.
>>>> Yes, though having one separate extensible product catalog would be
>>>> kind of cool and useful...
>>>>>
>>>>> cW
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 2015-05-28 17:54:37 +0000, Ed Merks said:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Christian,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Comments below.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 28/05/2015 7:40 PM, Christian W. Damus wrote:
>>>>>>> Hi, Oomphers,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> (?)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> What "products" are intended to be presented in the Products page of
>>>>>>> the Oomph setup wizard (and, therefore, listed in the product
>>>>>>> catalogue)? Is it exactly the set of EPP Packages published on
>>>>>>> download.eclipse.org?
>>>>>> Yes, currently the product catalog is generated from the EPP and
>>>>>> release train repositories.
>>>>>>> Is there a possibility for including other packages in this catalogue
>>>>>>> apart from those that are produced by the EPP project?
>>>>>> In theory. Note that there is one additional product, "Eclipse
>>>>>> Platform" that's not from the EPP package. It's the absolute minimal
>>>>>> installation, with no JDT, PDE, or anything else useful...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I ask because the Papyrus project has defined an RCP Papyrus workbench
>>>>>>> package that isn't an EPP, but which similarly provides a one-stop-shop
>>>>>>> for users that want to do UML modeling and such with Papyrus. To
>>>>>>> increase the reach of this package, there is interest in making it
>>>>>>> available through the Oomph installer, which I think (correct if I'm
>>>>>>> wrong) would require adding it to the product catalogue.
>>>>>> Or having additional product catalogs...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I expect that for the next release, Papyrus will negotiate as necessary
>>>>>>> to move this package to EPP so that it can just flow naturally through
>>>>>>> that channel, but that leaves the question of what can be done in Oomph
>>>>>>> for Mars.
>>>>>> I see. Easier for everyone (especially us), if it's an EPP package
>>>>>> that we can simply analyze and generate accordingly...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Christian
|
|
|
| Re: About the Product Catalogue [message #1697158 is a reply to message #1697146] |
Tue, 02 June 2015 01:20 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Christian,
Comments below.
On 02/06/2015 12:13 AM, Christian W. Damus wrote:
> Hi, Ed,
>
> Very cool! Thanks for taking such a keen interest in this. I think
> we may very well need to rely on it: I'm not sure how many
> modeling-ish packages Eclipse will want to provide via EPP. :-)
Yes, I'm sure it would be considered problematic if there were several
dozen package choices.
>
> Let me know if there's something I can do to help with testing or
> whatever.
I'd be interested to see how you would define your product definition.
I might consider writing some code that deletes the user.products.setup
if it doesn't contain a product catalog so I can add the entry to the
index for RC3...
>
> Christian
>
>
> On 2015-06-01 14:21:38 +0000, Ed Merks said:
>
>> Christian,
>>
>> Note that I've opened
>> https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=468958 and committed
>> changes. It won't all work until I add this to the index:
>>
>> <productCatalog
>> href="user:/user.products.setup?class='http://www.eclipse.org/oomph/setup/1.0%23//ProductCatalog',name='user.products',label='<User
>> Products>',description='A container catalog for local user-defined
>> products'#/"/>
>>
>> I'm holding off doing that because
>> org.eclipse.oomph.setup.internal.core.util.UserURIHandlerImpl.create(URI,
>> URI) in versions of Oomph before this commit will create a Product
>> instance instead of a ProductCatalog instance.
>>
>> Otherwise the new support works well. We've even defined a product
>> for the Oomph installer product which I've tested...
>>
>> http://git.eclipse.org/c/oomph/org.eclipse.oomph.git/tree/setups/OomphInstaller.setup
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 29/05/2015 6:02 PM, Ed Merks wrote:
>>> Christian,
>>>
>>> I've been prototyping support for this, because it seems
>>> interesting. It's not so hard. Please open an enhancement request
>>> and you can track progress there...
>>>
>>> I have something that actually works already. I'm trying to use it
>>> to install Oomph's installer product. An interesting exercise...
>>>
>>> It will also be interesting to prototype your new EEP package this
>>> way and get people to use it before the EPP productization is finished.
>>>
>>>
>>> On 29/05/2015 3:23 PM, Christian W. Damus wrote:
>>>> Thanks again, Ed.
>>>>
>>>> I think extensible/customizable product catalogues will be useful
>>>> especially for enterprise deployment of Oomph, but obviously
>>>> wouldn't be something we can think about for Mars. The Papyrus team
>>>> will work on defining an EPP package, which has its own advantages
>>>> anyways.
>>>>
>>>> Still happily oomphing,
>>>>
>>>> Christian
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 2015-05-29 11:59:23 +0000, Ed Merks said:
>>>>
>>>>> Christian,
>>>>>
>>>>> Comments below.
>>>>>
>>>>> On 29/05/2015 1:51 PM, Christian W. Damus wrote:
>>>>>> Thanks, Ed.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So, if I understand correctly, it's not so much that the content
>>>>>> of the product catalogue is determined by policy?
>>>>> Well, such things do have a political slant. It is expected that
>>>>> the product catalog contain the EEP products...
>>>>>> I am concerned mostly because of Oomph's positioning now as "the"
>>>>>> Eclipse Installer, which would seem to consumers to make it a
>>>>>> creature of the foundation or the planning council or some such,
>>>>>> so that there'd be an expectation that the "products" it offers
>>>>>> are somehow "official".
>>>>> Yes.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> (I'm not usually in the habit of applying scare quotes so liberally)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Just to be clear, the mechanism of adding a non-EPP package would
>>>>>> not be similar to the addition of projects to the Eclipse.org and
>>>>>> Github.com project catalogues, because the products are generated
>>>>>> from EPP? That is, it wouldn't be as "simple" as submitting a
>>>>>> bugzilla with an URL to a *.setup resource that the Oomph team
>>>>>> would review and then add to the catalogue.
>>>>> No, though just as we have the ability to drop any old project
>>>>> into one of the two project catalogs, it would certainly be nice
>>>>> to have similar types of things for product definitions. It's
>>>>> easier with projects because projects can contain projects so we
>>>>> simply add a "self generating" project to each project catalog.
>>>>> We could do something similar with an extension catalog that would
>>>>> allow one to locally add a product definition to an additional
>>>>> product catalog...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In any case, I think it sounds like we'll all be better off
>>>>>> waiting until this RCP (which is just a POM file someplace that,
>>>>>> apparently, doesn't actually build correctly at the moment) is
>>>>>> hosted by EPP with the processes and tools there to support it.
>>>>> Yes, though having one separate extensible product catalog would
>>>>> be kind of cool and useful...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> cW
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 2015-05-28 17:54:37 +0000, Ed Merks said:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Christian,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Comments below.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 28/05/2015 7:40 PM, Christian W. Damus wrote:
>>>>>>>> Hi, Oomphers,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> (?)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> What "products" are intended to be presented in the Products
>>>>>>>> page of the Oomph setup wizard (and, therefore, listed in the
>>>>>>>> product catalogue)? Is it exactly the set of EPP Packages
>>>>>>>> published on download.eclipse.org?
>>>>>>> Yes, currently the product catalog is generated from the EPP and
>>>>>>> release train repositories.
>>>>>>>> Is there a possibility for including other packages in this
>>>>>>>> catalogue apart from those that are produced by the EPP project?
>>>>>>> In theory. Note that there is one additional product, "Eclipse
>>>>>>> Platform" that's not from the EPP package. It's the absolute
>>>>>>> minimal installation, with no JDT, PDE, or anything else useful...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I ask because the Papyrus project has defined an RCP Papyrus
>>>>>>>> workbench package that isn't an EPP, but which similarly
>>>>>>>> provides a one-stop-shop for users that want to do UML modeling
>>>>>>>> and such with Papyrus. To increase the reach of this package,
>>>>>>>> there is interest in making it available through the Oomph
>>>>>>>> installer, which I think (correct if I'm wrong) would require
>>>>>>>> adding it to the product catalogue.
>>>>>>> Or having additional product catalogs...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I expect that for the next release, Papyrus will negotiate as
>>>>>>>> necessary to move this package to EPP so that it can just flow
>>>>>>>> naturally through that channel, but that leaves the question of
>>>>>>>> what can be done in Oomph for Mars.
>>>>>>> I see. Easier for everyone (especially us), if it's an EPP
>>>>>>> package that we can simply analyze and generate accordingly...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Christian
>
>
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Fri Oct 31 10:27:05 EDT 2025
Powered by FUDForum. Page generated in 0.06777 seconds |
Home