Re: [Wtp-wst-dev] Project granularity

[Jens Lukowski <jens.lukowski@xxxxxx>]

Hi Dave

Dave Carlson wrote:

> Hi David,
>  
> Yes, I meant org.eclipse.wst.ui.  As started by Jens, this plug-in 
> contains general UI related support for WST (and JST, if it includes a 
> dependency on WST).  I believe Jens also merged one or more other IBM 
> contrib plug-ins into this.

no, it's just the former com.ibm.base.extensions.ui plugin from the 
initial IBM contribution

> This seems like the right home for the tabbed property view support, 
> unless it will be absorbed by the Eclipse platform.
>  
> I'll continue some analysis of validation plug-in dependencies today.  
> I see that two of these plug-ins inclucde a requirement for JDT.  This 
> should be eliminated or factored out so that the XML-family editors 
> can run within the platform without JDT.  I'll look into why this 
> requirement exists.
>  
> Another question/observation:  Can we create a design rule for use of 
> *.core vs *.ui plug-ins?  Does such a rule exist for the Eclipse 
> platform?  I see several *.core plug-ins that include one or more 
> org.eclipse.ui.* plug-ins.  This seems wrong.  My understanding of the 
> *.core is that it should run in a headless platform configuration with 
> no UI.

I strongly agree with you here
but I think we shouldn't start any (bigger) refactorings before we have 
the unit tests in place so that we wouldn't break any existing functionality

also it would be nice if you could share some of your analysis results

Regards
 Jens Lukowski

>  
> Cheers,
>   Dave Carlson
>
>     -----Original Message-----
>     *From:* wtp-wst-dev-admin@xxxxxxxxxxx
>     [mailto:wtp-wst-dev-admin@xxxxxxxxxxx] *On Behalf Of *David M Williams
>
>      
>     BTW, you said org.eclipse.wtp.ui and suspect you meant
>     org.eclipse.wst.ui? 
>
>