Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [pde-dev] Target Platform question

On 05/30/2010 07:50 PM, Jeff McAffer wrote:

I like flexibility, SAT is fine and I agree that many situations are complex. There should be a new construct to capture and exploit these. That will be great to have in Indigo.  In Helios however, if you pick up the EMF SDK feature it says that it *includes*  If you add that to your product/feature and install, you may not get 2.6.0.x.  Having p2 metadata that does not match its corresponding feature is, IMHO, a problem. If feature publishers actually want that then they should spec requirements in their features to correctly convey the dependencies.

Given the current behavior of the target platform provisioning and the fact that its too late to change that now, I agree the default behavior should be to use a perfect match for feature includes. That's also what EMF SDK does now to avoid problems.

Regarding p2 metadata and feature mismatch, I don't see any problem. The feature is never used once the p2 meta-data has been generated. It acts as a template for the grouping IU and typically has no versions declared for its includes. They are always generated. This means that a) there is always a mismatch between the template and the generated IU, and b) the feature has no role to play beyond being used as a template. And then there's of course the p2.inf that can rewire the IU completely. Add that by just flipping a property, you can choose not to install the feature jars at all. So where is the problem really?

- thomas

Back to the top