Yes. The question is: Do we use the
oep.designer.languages.common.profile
feature in Papyrus-RT ?
If not, let it implicit
If Yes, we should add it explicitly.
Céline
De : papyrus-rt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:papyrus-rt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx]
De la part de Peter Cigéhn
Envoyé : mardi 18 octobre 2016 17:03
À : papyrus-rt developer discussions <papyrus-rt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Objet : Re: [papyrus-rt-dev] Papyrus Designer dependencies in Oomph setups
If the oep.designer.languages.common.profile gets added implicitly, then that is something that we cannot do anything about I guess. At least as long as we don't add the dependency to it explicitly
ourselves, I am fine with that.
On 18 October 2016 at 16:59, Céline JANSSENS <celine.janssens@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi Peter,
In RCP this is what I did. I reference dependencies of the following plugins on the rcp
feature (as I don’t know exactly which feature requires those plugins)
·
org.eclipse.papyrus.designer.languages.common.base
·
org.eclipse.papyrus.designer.languages.cpp.library
And when building RCP, the “oep.designer.languages.common.profile” dependency is added
implicitly
Regards
Céline
De :
papyrus-rt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:papyrus-rt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx]
De la part de Peter Cigéhn
Envoyé : mardi 18 octobre 2016 16:44
À : papyrus-rt developer discussions <papyrus-rt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Objet : Re: [papyrus-rt-dev] Papyrus Designer dependencies in Oomph setups
Yet one more aspect to iron out of the 0.8 release I guess... :)
I need to double check though since you mention one plugin that I cannot see referenced in the tester setup (and thus also the end-user
setup that Christian currently is updating for the 0.8 release).
The oep.designer.languages.common.profile I cannot see referenced from the tester setup. And I would not expect us to really have a
dependency to it either. To my knowledge we do not use any of the profiles from Designer since we decided to go the custom RtCppProperties profile that it specific to the code-generator in Papyrus-RT.
So what I then would expect is to only have
org.eclipse.papyrus.designer.languages.common.base
org.eclipse.papyrus.designer.languages.cpp.library
in the Oomph setup files.
If we do that, then we do not have to keep track of these implicitly in the Oomph setup files, and we can easier align the Oomph setups
and the RCP.
On 18 October 2016 at 16:02, Ernesto Posse <eposse@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi everyone.
We noticed that the "Open CDT Editor" option still appears in the context menu in both the tester and developer Oomph setups. This is because the setups still have a dependency
on oep.designer.languages.cpp.cdt.texteditor.
We also have a dependency on
-
oep.designer.languages.common.extensionpoints
-
oep.designer.languages.common.base
-
oep.designer.languages.common.profile
-
oep.designer.languages.cpp.library
but we only need the last three, as we are no longer using the extension points.
Are there any objections to remove the unused designer dependencies from the setup models?
I'm still familiarizing myself with the new build infrastructure, so I don't know if any changes here might yield something inconsistent with the POMs.
_______________________________________________
papyrus-rt-dev mailing list
papyrus-rt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/papyrus-rt-dev
_______________________________________________
papyrus-rt-dev mailing list
papyrus-rt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/papyrus-rt-dev
|
