Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Is exporting all packages a best practice

[John Arthorne <John_Arthorne@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Yep. Even in the Eclipse top-level project
which wrote that doc, it has been debated often. Introducing x-friends
was an attempt at a best of both worlds approach, but in the end we've
probably all been bitten by cases of consumers using internals and then
demanding/requesting some level of support. On the other hand, it's hard
to measure the community impact of closing the internals entirely. I updated
that wiki page to make it clear that is only one project's position.

John

"Konstantin Komissarchik" <konstantin.komissarchik@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sent by: cross-project-issues-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx

02/02/2011 04:26 PM

Please respond to
Cross project issues <cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>

To	"'Cross project issues'" <cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
cc
Subject	Re: [cross-project-issues-dev]        Is        exporting        all        packages        a        best        practice?

It would be worth pointing
out that there is debate on whether “export everything” is a good practice
or not. There are good arguments either way and I don’t think there will
ever be general consensus on this. I am not going to bother listing the
arguments as it is not my intention to re-start that debate. The referenced
wiki is the approach adopted by the Eclipse project and its subprojects,
but is by no means a final word on the subject.
 
Every project should discuss
this issue to make sure that all of the project’s committers are on board
with whatever approach is selected.
 
- Konstantin
 
 
From: cross-project-issues-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:cross-project-issues-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Thomas Watson
Sent: Wednesday, February 02, 2011 1:17 PM
To: Cross project issues
Subject: Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Is exporting all packages a
best practice?
 
This is an equinox only feature.  The
unfortunate consequence is that on another framework implementation the
x-internal (or x-friends) directives will be ignored and the package will
be exported with not option to run in "strict mode".

Tom
 
-----cross-project-issues-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
wrote: -----
To: Cross project issues <cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
From: Eike Stepper <stepper@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sent by: cross-project-issues-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
Date: 02/02/2011 03:34AM
Subject: Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Is exporting all packages a best
practice?

Am 02.02.2011 10:17, schrieb Daniel Megert:
>>> See http://wiki.eclipse.org/Export-Package
>> Thank you, Dani. That may be what I was looking for.
>>
>> But it does not explain the difference between or consequences
of:
>>
>> a) exporting a non-API package as x-internal
>> b) not exporting it at all
> Adding x-internal helps your clients during development time as it
warns
> them (discouraged access) when they use a type from such a package.
During
> runtime, it allows that in non-strict (i.e. default) mode (see
> osgi.resolverMode runtime option) the types from an x-internal package
can
> be loaded and hence clients can use types from non-API packages. If
you
> don't add the non-API packages with x-internal to the manifest then
any
> app using code from such a package won't even work in non-strict mode
as
> the types would not be loaded by the class loader. Once you start
in
> strict mode all types from x-internal packages won't load either.
Thanks again. I've also just verified that (you may laugh) and I fully
agree now.

Is "x-internal" spec'ed in OSGi or is it an Equinox thing?

Cheers
/Eike

----
http://www.esc-net.de
http://thegordian.blogspot.com
http://twitter.com/eikestepper


_______________________________________________
cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev
 _______________________________________________
cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev