| Migrating to 3.0M9: observations and problems; seeking advice [message #248478] |
Wed, 02 June 2004 14:41  |
Eclipse User |
|
|
|
I've been reading the various posts from others who are making
the transition to 3.0M9. Also I have reviewed the Eclipse 3.0
Porting guide (Draft for RC1, dated May 28, 2004).
I have several plugins that I am attempting to migrate from 3.0M8 to 3.0M9.
What I observe is that after using "Migrate to 3.0...", the plugin.xml
editor does not display the dependencies on other plugins (either in
the Eclipse platform or my own plugins). Also, certain important
information (plugin class name, version, provider name, etc.) is not
displayed by the plugin.xml editor.
All of that information still seems to be in the plugin.xml text, and
some of it is also (apparently) duplicated in the MANIFEST.MF that was
created. I have also seen cases where some attributes appear more than
once in the MANIFEST.MF (with different values) after the migration tool
has been run.
The consequence of this seems to be that the Java compiler does not have
visibility to any of the "platform" APIs such as are contained in the
org.eclipse.core.runtime packages.
I am fully prepared to update my plugins to remove calls to deprecated
APIs and to add other calls as may be appropriate. In fact, I believe
that I have already repaired the deprecations, and was on my way to
adding the start() and stop() lifecycle methods when I did something to
cause my current situation.
Thanks in advance for any help; if it's "Read The Fine Manual", please
gently point out what I've missed.
Regards,
Tom Johnson
|
|
|
| Re: Migrating to 3.0M9: observations and problems; seeking advice [message #248609 is a reply to message #248478] |
Wed, 02 June 2004 19:39  |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Tom Johnson wrote:
> I have several plugins that I am attempting to migrate from 3.0M8 to
> 3.0M9.
Hi Tom,
I've just been through the same nursing process of "break-a-bit,
learn-a-bit" and the light at the end of the tunnel is good.
> What I observe is that after using "Migrate to 3.0...", the
> plugin.xml editor does not display the dependencies on other plugins
> (either in the Eclipse platform or my own plugins).
> All of that information still seems to be in the plugin.xml text, and
> some of it is also (apparently) duplicated in the MANIFEST.MF that
> was created. I have also seen cases where some attributes appear
> more than once in the MANIFEST.MF (with different values) after the
> migration tool has been run.
One thing which I experienced was that (somehow), the MANIFEST.MF file
became "corrupt" (read: not quite exactly perfect) and thereafter the
plugin editor refused to show things to me, this could be related to
your problem.
I didn't see any intentional indication to alert me to the fact that the
manifest file was up the spout in this way.
https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=64254
To solve this, I deleted the MANIFEST.MF file and then recreated it
using the link in the Runtime tab of the Plugin Manifest Editor.
I have also been through every package and, (again in the Runtime Tab)
re-exported the appropriate (depended upon) library from every one of my
project's 20 plugins.
Having done this, and having worked through every deprecation, I seem to
be back to a working system.
Now I have to start fixing my own bugs instead :)
HTH
Rich
|
|
|
| Re: Migrating to 3.0M9: observations and problems; seeking advice [message #248788 is a reply to message #248609] |
Thu, 03 June 2004 08:47 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Rich Boakes wrote:
(snip)
> I've just been through the same nursing process of "break-a-bit,
> learn-a-bit" and the light at the end of the tunnel is good.
I'm relieved to hear that, even though there is yet work
to be done.
(snip)
>
> https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=64254\
That explains my situation very well. I had gone through some Bugzilla
queries but I failed to find that particular entry. It seems I picked
a secondary symptom as my query terms.
>
> To solve this, I deleted the MANIFEST.MF file and then recreated it
> using the link in the Runtime tab of the Plugin Manifest Editor.
>
> I have also been through every package and, (again in the Runtime Tab)
> re-exported the appropriate (depended upon) library from every one of my
> project's 20 plugins.
This makes my 10 or so sound entirely workable ... ;-)
> Having done this, and having worked through every deprecation, I seem to
> be back to a working system.
>
> Now I have to start fixing my own bugs instead :)
Oddly enough, at this point, I would be glad to repair my own software.
> HTH
It helps a lot! Thank you and all others who contributed to identifying
the workaround ... and to making 3.0RC1 move along. FWIW, from 3.0M4
until 3.0M9, this is the most puzzling issue I have encountered.
> Rich
|
|
|
|
| Re: Migrating to 3.0M9: observations and problems; seeking advice [message #248936 is a reply to message #248873] |
Thu, 03 June 2004 12:18 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Rich Kulp wrote:
> For 3.0 you don't need the MANIFEST. It is a future replacement for the
> plugin.xml, but at this time it is best to stick with only the
> plugin.xml. Otherwise the MANIFEST can quickly get out of date since it
> is not maintained like the plugin.xml is by the PDE.
That's useful to know now that things are (nearly) all working again ...
so when I break them (again), I will be aware of that.
I'm trying to make sure I stay somewhat in step with the APIs and other
workbench mechanisms, to spread out the effort of transition. I tend
to avoid anything but milestone releases and that has worked well so
far. What that means is that I generally make all required changes and
most of the recommended ones.
IMHO, the "Eclipse 3.0 Porting Guide" could be a little more explicit
about this sort of thing, since "3.0" (as stated above) seems to mean
"something after 3.0RC1".
I'm sure the developers know when they plan
to fold things in, but when any given customizer/user reads a revision
of the "3.0 Porting Guide" it would be helpful to know things that "are
on the horizon, but neither required nor recommended". From context,
I inferred (incorrectly) that the MANIFEST.MF was "recommended" for 3.0RC1.
Having said that, let me also say that the "3.0 Porting Guide" and
other such documents are immensely helpful, and I realize that keeping
them up requires effort. They are indeed appreciated.
Tom Johnson
|
|
|
Powered by
FUDForum. Page generated in 0.05935 seconds
Home