Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Orbit composite repository and discoveryURL

Hi Eike,

From what I can remember, one reason to "include" things that you don't build yourself in a feature is when that same feature is used to drive creation of a downloadable ZIP that's meant to be usable by itself. The downloadable ZIP cannot reference any additional stuff that it "requires" so it needs to "include" them.

To some extent that seems to be a legacy problem with p2 repos being increasingly common. In some sense, using a "feature" just to drive building a ZIP and/or generated source bundles seems to be a wrong approach anyways. Perhaps it would make sense to split things into (a) features that are meant for p2 repo consumers, and (b) features as releng artifacts that drive builds only. In that case, the (b) type of features should just not be published into the p2 repos.

I'd be keen to hear build experts' opinions on that matter (b3, Buckminster, tycho...)

Martin Oberhuber, SMTS / Product Architect - Development Tools, Wind River
direct +43.662.457915.85  fax +43.662.457915.6

-----Original Message-----
From: cross-project-issues-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:cross-project-issues-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Eike Stepper
Sent: Thursday, February 03, 2011 8:38 AM
To: Cross project issues
Subject: [cross-project-issues-dev] Orbit composite repository and discoveryURL


In the recent thread "Orbit build qualifiers changing with each build" I proposed not to *include* Orbit features any longer, but rather reference them (for example through the discovery URL element in the feature.xml). Nobody commented on that, so I would like to bring it up again as a separate thread. Thomas said, it's not Buckminster that creates the dependency ranges as [x,x]. I still don't know who's responsible for these dangerous dependencies and I feel like the more important question is:

     Is it generally good to *include* things that we've not built ourselves?

An example: The CDO build needs EMF but of course we don't *include* EMF in our repositories because EMF is already available in their own repositories. We only say that we *need* EMF [x,y) and all goes fine. Orbit also has its own repositories, so why do I have to *include* their stuff?

I'm not yet able to say whether the discoveryURL mechansim is adequate to *reference* Orbit features. Regardless what mechansim could do that, I'd like to hear if there are general objections and why.

The second question is: Will Orbit take actions to provide us with a composite repository in the near future? Or at least with a single URL that does never change?



cross-project-issues-dev mailing list

Back to the top