Ok for me ;)
De : papyrus-rt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:papyrus-rt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx]
De la part de Ernesto Posse
Envoyé : mardi 18 octobre 2016 17:22
À : papyrus-rt developer discussions <papyrus-rt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Objet : Re: [papyrus-rt-dev] Papyrus Designer dependencies in Oomph setups
Right. I'll push a gerrit to check, but there are two sets of changes:
1) to the setup models (tester and developer)
2) to the manifest of oeprt.codegen.cpp
My question is whether you are ok with each of these.
I'll add you as a reviewer.
Hi Ernesto,
Be careful, because sometimes, deleting a plugin from a Manifest
doesn’t seem to raise any issue, but when building the plugin, it can break some dependencies.
You can at least test it through Gerrit ;)
Regards
Céline
![]()
De :
papyrus-rt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:papyrus-rt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx]
De la part de Ernesto Posse
Envoyé : mardi 18 octobre 2016 17:11
À : papyrus-rt developer discussions <papyrus-rt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Objet : Re: [papyrus-rt-dev] Papyrus Designer dependencies in Oomph setups
We had the
oep.designer.languages.common.profile plugin in the
oeprt.codegen.cpp plugin. It's in the manifest. I do not remember why it was there. I just tried removing it and there doesn't seem to be a problem, so we can remove that as well.
So are there any objections to these changes?
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
_______________________________________________
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
|
