Hi
Yes. Correction. Time flies. It was Java 8 that chnaged the
implementation.
You are certainly right that build.properties did not allow 1.0.0
and 2.0.0 annotations to co-exist, pretty much mandating a
migration.
But I am really surprised that you can have *.class files
referencing missing (annotation) classes. I suspect that you may
be getting a free import from somewhere.
The Eclipse help is dangerous because it was not updated for
2.0.0 causing me much grief. A boring RequireBundle works
beautifully.
Regards
Ed Willink
On 17/02/2019 10:50, Michael Keppler
wrote:
o.e.jdt.annotation
2.0.0 exploits Java 7 type annotations which persist at
run-time. You must therefore require o.e.jdt.annotation just
like any other bundle.
You meant Java 8. And they are not available at runtime (they
use RetentionPolicy.CLASS), therefore the bundle.properties
mechanism still works well with jdt.annotations 2.x, and bundle
requirements are not necessary.
To quote the Eclipse help on these annotations: "The PDE
specific mechanism in file build.properties is
problematic because it doesn't support specifying a version
range." (and that is why they recommend optional bundle
requirement). Therefore if you can manage your target platform
to explicitly contain only the 2.x annotations, build.properties
work well. At least that is my experience with several
commercial applications built that way. Nevertheless, I have not
tried this with recent builds like Bernd, so this may no longer
work and my remarks might be useless.
Ciao, Michael
_______________________________________________
cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev
