Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [ecf-dev] Two issues I feel that needs a healthydiscussion overbefore ECF 1.0...

Hi Scott,

If we end up going with splitting the ECF core plugin I would suggest we
consider 3 resulting plugins

identity (namespace extension point):  org.eclipse.ecf.core.identity
container (containerFactory extension point):
org.eclipse.ecf.core.container
shared object (sharedObjectFactory extension point):
org.eclipse.ecf.core.sharedobject

What exactly is going to be identity? The IContainer interface defines
methods that requires Namespaces and IDs, so how do you plan to split
those two apart?

But before we go too much further in these directions...do people really
feel this is necessary?  That is, do the size reduction benefits (<
136K) obviously outweigh the overhead (addl complexity, more meta files,
etc) of having multiple plugins?  Perhaps the answer is obviously 'yes',
but I just want to explore this a little before we just do it.

Tough call, sorting by size within the plugins/ folder do show quite a
few plug-ins that are below the 100kb mark. Perhaps Pascal or Philippe
can comment on this bit. Though I think that the question we need to
ask ourselves right now is "how often do bundles/plug-ins that depensd
on org.eclipse.ecf at the moment actually use the shared object subset
of interfaces/classes?" Going through org.eclipse.ecf.presence, I
notice that pretty much nothing is used besides ID and IContainer, and
we know org.eclipse.ecf.filetransfer is similar per previously
discussed. I'm not really familiar with the other plug-ins, so I can't
comment on those.

Regards,
Rem


Back to the top