Re: [eclipse-dev] Your plug-in may be a liability if...: ACTION REQUIRED

["Max Rydahl Andersen" <max.andersen@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Thu, 07 Apr 2005 15:49:41 +0200, Jeff McAffer <Jeff_McAffer@xxxxxxxxxx>  
wrote:

> Max,
>
> I think there is some confusion here.  Plugin A contains some packages
> declares exports for them.  Plugin B needs some of the packages so
> declares imports for them or "requires"  A.  If A is free to add packages
> to its export list without affecting B.  B does not have to change.  A  
> can
> remove exports but should be mindful of API implications.  Again this  
> does
> not affect B (as long as it can still be resolved).
>
> The magic of plugins is that they know what they have (their exports) and
> they know that they need (imports/requires).  These lists for A are
> independent of the lists for B.  Are we talking about the same thing?

Yes - or at least I think so ,)

I follow your arguments for keeping api's strict.

What I'm just "nagging" about is that from my understanding when
I run an eclipse workbench from inside eclipse i'm not running under the
same restrictions as if I started eclipse normally (especailly ALL classes  
are
available to me, even though its not listed in the plugin.xml).

So I would only discover any missing package exports by starting eclipse
standalone - which is not something I do every day while developing.

/max

> As for the tooling, in mere days the full power of PDE will come to bear
> on the classpath and give you control over what you see.  In fact, even
> today the classpath that PDE manages only exposes the things that you
> export.  Coming is the ability to change to a strict mode where the
> "internal" exports are not visible either.  I think you will find that
> PDE's modelling of the classpath is pretty good (Note it will not be
> perfect.  That would require very significant effort for marginal
> incremental gain).
>
> Jeff
>
>
>
> "Max Rydahl Andersen" <max.andersen@xxxxxxxxx>
> Sent by: eclipse-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
> 04/07/2005 08:32 AM
> Please respond to
> "General development mailing list of the Eclipse project."
>
>
> To
> "General development mailing list of the Eclipse project."
> <eclipse-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> cc
>
> Subject
> Re: [eclipse-dev] Your  plug-in may     be      a       liability if...:
> ACTION  REQUIRED/ACTION REQUISE
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > practice. What
> > is the problem with that? After all, as you say in the end, you are
> > developing
> > plugins.
>
>
> This explicit listing of packages are a pain since:
>
>  From my understanding plugins will not be possible to access any new
> packages added to some of the libraries without updating the plugin.xml
> (and that is bad if users should be allowed to update the dependent
> library without
> needing to mess with package names)
>
> And when you run the workbench from inside PDE you have access to all
> classes/packages
> in your PDE project no matter what the plugin.xml says....at least that  
> is
> my current experience.
> Meaning that you will not discover any classloading issues until you  
> start
> from a total clean eclipse,
> which wont happen very often while you develop.
>
> /max
>
>
> > _______________________________________________
> >
> > eclipse-dev  mailing  list
> >
> > eclipse-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> >
> > To  change  your  delivery  options,  retrieve  your  password,  or
> > unsubscribe  from  this  list,  visit
> >
> > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse-dev



--
--
Max Rydahl Andersen
callto://max.rydahl.andersen

Hibernate
max@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://hibernate.org

JBoss Inc
max.andersen@xxxxxxxxx
http://jboss.com