Re: [e4-dev] E4 Extension Points

[Eric Moffatt <emoffatt@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi folks, thanks for the input. I think I need to partially re-state the question...

There's little doubt that option 1 will be done for allowing the ability to contribute e4 bits into the IDE -- but --

This approach won't be usable in 'pure' e4 rcp apps because the EP's reference IDE classes like ViewPart...

...so...should we also supply e4-specific extension points for common elements or leave the fragment / model processing as the only way to contribute to e4 apps ?

Eric

Patrick Paulin ---07/11/2013 01:18:34 PM---I agree with Lars that option 1 is better. But is there a reason we couldn't specify a POJO in the n

From:	Patrick Paulin <patrick@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
To:	E4 Project developer mailing list <e4-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>,
Date:	07/11/2013 01:18 PM
Subject:	Re: [e4-dev] E4 Extension Points
Sent by:	e4-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx

---

I agree with Lars that option 1 is better. But is there a reason we couldn't specify a POJO in the normal view "class" attribute? Whether the class implements IViewPart or is a POJO that needs to be wrapped seems like an implementation detail. 

--- Patrick

On Jul 11, 2013, at 4:34 AM, Lars Vogel <lars.vogel@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

My understanding of 1.) is that the framework would accept Pojos. In would allow a smooth migration of the existing Eclipse IDE plug-in projects.



2013/7/11 Jonas Helming <jonas.helming@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Hi,
I agree with Lars. However, even option 1 seems like a duplication of fragments and processors to me. The main disadvantage for me would be, that you still stick to the old API. What is the advantage?
Regards
Jonas

Am 11.07.2013 11:22, schrieb Lars Vogel:
Hi Eric,

I think 1.) would be the right thing. 2.) feels like a duplication of model fragments and model processors to me.

Best regards, Lrs


2013/7/10 Eric Moffatt <emoffatt@xxxxxxxxxx>
I'm currently looking at what we're going to do as far as extension points go to enable folks to contribute e4 (DI) code into the IDE and I want to get some feedback from the e4 community as to the best way for me to do this...

I have two possible approaches:

1) Extend the current IDE extension points with e4-specific sections (i.e. extend the existing org.eclipse.ui.views EP to allow the addition of 'e4 View')
2) Provide separate extension points for the e4 bits (i.e. clone the existing org.eclipse.ui.views EP and tweak it to be e4-related

Do you *want* e4 specific extension points ? This is independent of having the ability to contribute them through fragment / model processing (which we'll also be working on in Luna). The BOF at last year's eclipsecon didn't come to a resolution on this (at least not one that I remember..;-).

Let me know what you think,
Eric


_______________________________________________
e4-dev mailing list
e4-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/e4-dev




_______________________________________________
e4-dev mailing list
e4-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/e4-dev



_______________________________________________
e4-dev mailing list
e4-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/e4-dev


_______________________________________________
e4-dev mailing list
e4-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/e4-dev

_______________________________________________
e4-dev mailing list
e4-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/e4-dev