| Summary: | [Tooling] Breaking changes in the latest org.eclipse.pde.core bundle | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [RT] RAP | Reporter: | Ivan Furnadjiev <ivan> |
| Component: | Releng | Assignee: | Project Inbox <rap-inbox> |
| Status: | RESOLVED WONTFIX | QA Contact: | |
| Severity: | normal | ||
| Priority: | P1 | CC: | beyhan.veliev, ronald.so |
| Version: | 1.5 | ||
| Target Milestone: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | All | ||
| OS: | All | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
|
Description
Ivan Furnadjiev
May be RAP can provide two tooling repositories. One for Eclipse 3.7 and 3.6 and one for 3.8 and 4.2. IMHO giving up the support for 3.7 in the new tooling is OK. I don't think that maintaining two different tooling repositories is an option for us. That's too much effort. I did some testing last week on different Eclipse platforms. The most important result is from the combination Eclipse SDK 3.7.1 + RAP Tooling 1.4 + RAP Runtime 1.5M5 where everything was working fine with two limitation: 1. When new project is created from a template, the generated launch configurations miss some bundles - Jetty bundles, Apache Felix Gogo bundles, Equinox Console bundle, RWT OSGi bundle. Have to be added manually. 2. RAP help bundle does not include the content for 1.5 development stream. RAP Tooling >= 1.5M4 *must* be used with Eclipse Platform >= 3.8M4 or >= 4.2M4 and RAP Runtime >= 1.5M4 Besides the new PDE target API, there is also the namespace change for Jetty and the change of the javax.servlet version. At least the RWT launcher has dependencies to several Jetty packages. It seems that there are different places that would need to be changed in order to make the 1.5 Tooling compatible to 3.7 IDEs. Since the differences between the 1.4 and the 1.5 tooling are rather small and the RAP 1.4 tooling works well also with RAP 1.5, I think that we should invest this time more important improvements in RAP than creating a compatibility layer. Users who work with an Eclipse 3.7 IDE should use the RAP 1.4 tooling and install a RAP 1.5 target. If this is not acceptable, please reopen this bug. |