[jbosstools-dev] RFE: JDT module or put in common ?

[Max Rydahl Andersen]

> I'd say regardless of the feature/plugin namespace you select (eg., o.j.t.jdt, as Denis +1'd), I can't see any compelling reason to create a new module for this.
> 
> Therefore, let's put it in the common module. So say we all?

Created https://issues.jboss.org/browse/JBIDE-9545 for this.

org.jboss.tools.common.jdt.feature is thus now born; starting with a jdt.debug.* plugin.

/max

> N
> 
>> 
>> /max
>> 
>>> 
>>> N
>>> 
>>> On 07/21/2011 07:56 AM, Max Rydahl Andersen wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> Unfortunately, I don't see any other practical solution.
>>>>> +1 for a new JDT module
>>>>> I would add plugins / features for JBIDE-8972 under the
>>>>> org.jboss.tools.jdt.classpath namespace
>>>> 
>>>> I would suggest org.jboss.tools.jdt.core/ui as the plugin name and then if necessary package names under that.
>>>> 
>>>> Snjezana's could fit in there too or if necessary org.jboss.tools.jdt.debug.core/ui.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> my 0.02�.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> 
>>>>> Fred Bricon
>>>>> 
>>>>> On 21/07/2011 10:47, Max Rydahl Andersen wrote:
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Snjezana have been working on https://issues.jboss.org/browse/JBIDE-8548 (easy Attach to Remote debugger)
>>>>>> and Fred is about to work on https://issues.jboss.org/browse/JBIDE-8972  (copy classpath library to project)
>>>>>> which both are things that actually should exist/be contributed to Eclipse JDT at some point.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> The question is where do we put them today ?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Looking at existing modules putting it in common under a new plugin named org.jboss.tools.common.jdt.* is probably the best fit,
>>>>>> but since common is also much more than that its not the best - its actually mostly related to xmodel than anything else - and
>>>>>> I could see the interest in installing these JDT features without having to require all of xmodel and its editors extensions installed.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> The alternative I see is creating a new module (sigh) named jdt with org.jboss.tools.jdt.* as its base and
>>>>>> we create a matching feature named "JBoss Tools JDT - Extensions for Eclipse JDT"
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I'm leaning to the JDT module approach, but since i'm really not a fan of adding more and more modules without
>>>>>> a good reason I would like to hear if anyone has convincing arguments for or against this move ?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>> /max
>>>>>> http://about.me/maxandersen
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> jbosstools-dev mailing list
>>>>>> jbosstools-dev at lists.jboss.org
>>>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbosstools-dev
>>>>> 
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> jbosstools-dev mailing list
>>>>> jbosstools-dev at lists.jboss.org
>>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbosstools-dev
>>>> 
>>>> /max
>>>> http://about.me/maxandersen
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> jbosstools-dev mailing list
>>>> jbosstools-dev at lists.jboss.org
>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbosstools-dev
>>> 
>>> --
>>> Nick Boldt :: JBoss by Red Hat
>>> Productization Lead :: JBoss Tools&  Dev Studio
>>> http://nick.divbyzero.com
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> jbosstools-dev mailing list
>>> jbosstools-dev at lists.jboss.org
>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbosstools-dev
>> 
>> /max
>> http://about.me/maxandersen
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> -- 
> Nick Boldt :: JBoss by Red Hat
> Productization Lead :: JBoss Tools & Dev Studio
> http://nick.divbyzero.com

/max
http://about.me/maxandersen