|Re: [tycho-dev] FW: using <feature-id>.feature.group as artifactId|
See inline... -- Regards, Igor On 11-11-29 6:19 AM, Oberlies, Tobias wrote:
Opening to all tycho developers... -----Original Message----- From: ldi-developers-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ldi-developers-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Oberlies, Tobias Sent: Dienstag, 29. November 2011 12:14 To: Sievers, Jan; Igor Fedorenko Subject: Re: [ldi-developers] using<feature-id>.feature.group as artifactId I am -0 on supporting artifactId=<featureId>.feature.group. AFAIK the ".feature.group" suffix is not API of p2, so we shouldn't make it API of Tycho. But I see that this could be an alternative workaround to the GAV uniqueness problem.
For all intents and purposes artifactId is internal to Tycho, so I don't see a problem here.
I am -1 on disallowing artifactId=<featureId>. This would mean that people who name their features "org.example.tool.feature" would be forced to set the groupId "org.example.tool.feature.feature.group". This makes it easy to use the same IDs for features and bundles (which is IMHO a mediocre idea), and put burden on people who name their features properly.
In any case, Tycho would need to cope with a non-unique mapping between artifactId and Eclipse Id (at least in the transition phase) - and if we need to implement this anyway, we could also just keep it. One reason for not allowing arbitrary artifactIds is that fixing all the problems it entails  was deemed too much effort.
Supporting two variants is far easier than allowing arbitrary feature-id/artifacyId mapping.
Regards Tobias  https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=353384-----Original Message----- From: Sievers, Jan Sent: Dienstag, 29. November 2011 09:45 To: Igor Fedorenko; Oberlies, Tobias Subject: RE: using<feature-id>.feature.group as artifactId +1 the case where there are plugins and features with the same id is unfortunately pretty common and our workaround with a different groupId is ugly. Appending .feature.group is consistent with how p2 solved the same problem. Regards Jan -----Original Message----- From: Igor Fedorenko [mailto:igor@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] Sent: Montag, 28. November 2011 21:00 To: Oberlies, Tobias; Sievers, Jan Subject: using<feature-id>.feature.group as artifactId One thing I forgot to mention today. To disambiguate features and bundles with the same id, p2 adds .feature.group suffix when generating IU id from feature id, if feature id does not end with .feature.group already. I would like to do the same in Tycho, only do this more aggressively. For 0.14 allow artifactId with and without .feature.group suffix but when .feature.group is not present. For the next version only allow artifactId=<feature-id>.feature.group In other words, 0.14 feature.xml id=org.some.feature pom.xml artifactId=org.some.feature => WARNING pom.xml artifactId=org.some.feature.feature.group OK In the next version feature.xml id=org.some.feature pom.xml artifactId=org.some.feature => FAILURE pom.xml artifactId=org.some.feature.feature.group OK I really dislike using special groupId and I think there are cases where assuming unique artifactId for entire reactor build will make things easier. What do you think? -- Regards, Igor_______________________________________________ tycho-dev mailing list tycho-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/tycho-dev
Back to the top