[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [p2-dev] policy.xml Replacement?
- From: Nick Boldt <nickboldt@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 09 May 2009 17:47:17 -0400
- Delivered-to: email@example.com
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=TN75qjBOksl2bCTaqqrogJB34pibLnquPozDiDfDyho2pKmfPUDOsUedYeATu5jbqf hPeiJWQWZ3IMcGMjODCx2fKkhwYlxti44GiAULBF9c9P74N0DWW442lZ7dq40EmcRIsf FgI/UV0f9pywdQ5vTNol2VOTM0DeDzAUNJ4fs=
- User-agent: Thunderbird 22.214.171.124 (X11/20090320)
I think that for the features you are in control of, it is a good
practice to get rid of the URL in the features.
So eclipse.org projects (post M7) should remove their <update> (and
<discovery> too?) URLs in their feature.xmls?
How will those installed features know where to go for updates, if not
from the feature.xml? Will they simply refer back to the location from
which they were installed - be it http:, file: or jar: ?
If a project is installed from, say, the Galileo site initially - for
example, EMF 2.5.0 - and the user wants to update to 2.5.3, which is
released AFTER the Feb 2010 release of Galileo SR2, will the user have
to manually add that URL? If the installed features refer back to only
the location from which they were installed, updates on another site
will not be found.
Of course the bonus here is that upon searching the Galileo site the
first time, 20+ extra update sites won't magically appear in the list of
sites. Is that a bonus, or a tragic flaw? Is it better to force users to
hunt down URLs themselves, or to overpopulate their list w/ sites they
may never use?
Or have I completely misunderstood the rationale and effect of removing
Nick Boldt :: http://wiki.eclipse.org/User:Nickb
Release Engineer :: Eclipse Modeling & Dash Athena