Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [platform-ui-dev] requestion plugin cleanup

If use is discouraged, how was it ever provisional? I plan on providing provisional API that is not used internally by my component. It exists solely for clients.  IMO, this is the classic "provisional" (vs. stuff that is used internally, and a few clients have asked to promote to API).  So, if I have code that is not even used internally, why would I mark it "internal"?


Douglas Pollock <douglas.pollock@xxxxxxxx>
Sent by: platform-ui-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx

02/23/2006 11:33 AM

Please respond to
dpollock@xxxxxxx; Please respond to
"Eclipse Platform UI component developers list." <platform-ui-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>

"Eclipse Platform UI component developers list." <platform-ui-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Re: [platform-ui-dev] requestion plugin cleanup

On Thursday February 23 2006 11:26 am, Boris Bokowski wrote:
> Basically, everything under .internal is not API, and the API contract
> (guaranteed binary upwards compatibility) does not apply. For Platform UI,
> the convention we've been using is .internal.provisional for those
> packages that might become API in the future, but there are no promises.
> I'm all for marking the above mentioned packages as x-internal, or
> as x-friends if needed to avoid compile errors in our plug-ins.  This
> would make it clear to clients that the usual API contract does not
> apply. Using x-friends is like having a private contract between, say,
> JFace and Workbench. In general, we should try to avoid these special
> contracts and play by the API rules, but sometimes the exception proves
> the rule ;-).

As a note, for the commands contributions work, I moved all provision API into
"internal" (not "internal.provisional") and marked the packages as

I agree with Boris that they should be marked internal, so people will get the
warning that using it is "discouraged".

platform-ui-dev mailing list

Back to the top