|
|
|
| Re: WTP 1.0 to 1.5 API/extension points migration guide [message #168123 is a reply to message #168014] |
Sun, 30 April 2006 17:01   |
 David Williams
Messages: 722
Registered: July 2009 |
Senior Member |
|
|
On Sat, 29 Apr 2006 10:47:33 -0400, Max Rydahl Andersen
<max.andersen@jboss.com> wrote:
>
> so, I figured it out and it is *very* suttle!
>
> .....
>
> Can anyone tell me why ? And if it is so, why doesn't something complain
> hard when a content-type id contains dot's ?
>
Max, I don't think its just content type IDs, it should be true for any
extension ID.
For details, see https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=128866
Funny thing is ... this was the whole reason for the 'a' part of 3.2M5a.
And ... as part of the "workaround" was that the new namespace naming rules
should have an effect only if you update your plugin to say
<?eclipse version="3.2"?>
That is, ID's with dot's should still work if the PI at top of eclipse
plugin
still says <?eclipse version="3.2"?>
(And, BTW, the platform team would say the rule of "no dot's in ID names"
is not not new ... just a new
enforcement of them :)
So, if you did not use 3.2 in PI, that might be worth opening a new bug
related to bug 128866.
If you did use 3.2, then you were not only breaking original syntax rules
on IDs, but you
even asked for the new enforcement of them :)
|
|
|
| Re: WTP 1.0 to 1.5 API/extension points migration guide [message #168179 is a reply to message #168123] |
Mon, 01 May 2006 14:05 |
Max Rydahl Andersen
Messages: 233
Registered: July 2009 |
Senior Member |
|
|
>> so, I figured it out and it is *very* suttle!
>>
>> .....
>>
>> Can anyone tell me why ? And if it is so, why doesn't something
>> complain hard when a content-type id contains dot's ?
>>
>
> Max, I don't think its just content type IDs, it should be true for any
> extension ID.
> For details, see https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=128866
That is the bug thingy I remembered.
> Funny thing is ... this was the whole reason for the 'a' part of 3.2M5a.
> And ... as part of the "workaround" was that the new namespace naming
> rules
> should have an effect only if you update your plugin to say
> <?eclipse version="3.2"?>
I did not update any plugin.xml to 3.2.
> That is, ID's with dot's should still work if the PI at top of eclipse
> plugin
> still says <?eclipse version="3.2"?>
>
> (And, BTW, the platform team would say the rule of "no dot's in ID
> names" is not not new ... just a new
> enforcement of them :)
Which i'm quite fine with; but they could be good sports and make the PDE
editor warn about them ;)
> So, if you did not use 3.2 in PI, that might be worth opening a new bug
> related to bug 128866.
> If you did use 3.2, then you were not only breaking original syntax
> rules on IDs, but you
> even asked for the new enforcement of them :)
blah ;)
i'll open a bug.
--
Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
|
|
|
|
Powered by
FUDForum. Page generated in 0.03420 seconds
] 
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
