Bugzilla – Full Text Bug Listing
| Summary: | [CBI] CBI builds missing source bundles for branding bundles | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Eclipse Project] Platform | Reporter: | Curtis Windatt <curtis.windatt.public> | ||||
| Component: | Releng | Assignee: | Platform-Releng-Inbox <platform-releng-inbox> | ||||
| Status: | RESOLVED FIXED | QA Contact: | |||||
| Severity: | major | ||||||
| Priority: | P2 | CC: | akurtakov, daniel_megert, david_williams, jan.sievers, john.arthorne, pwebster | ||||
| Version: | 4.3 | ||||||
| Target Milestone: | 4.2.2+ | ||||||
| Hardware: | PC | ||||||
| OS: | Windows 7 | ||||||
| Whiteboard: | |||||||
| Bug Depends on: | |||||||
| Bug Blocks: | 393922, 396445, 434596 | ||||||
| Attachments: |
|
||||||
|
Description
Curtis Windatt
Yes, and these are often listed "in" source features too, so if the feature says it includes one, and its not there, that'll break something I'm sure. [Unless of course we decide to remove from features too ... I've not checked the features ... just assuming they are (still) listed there as they used to be. ] AFAIK tycho doesn't produce source bundles for the branding ones as they have no source in them. I thought we had a bug where we acknowledged this already. Thanh? PW (In reply to comment #2) > AFAIK tycho doesn't produce source bundles for the branding ones as they > have no source in them. I thought we had a bug where we acknowledged this > already. Thanh? > I recall this being the case as well. However I can't seem to find the bug for this where it was discussed. I'll post again later if I can find it. I modified the tests to use pde.ui.source instead of pde.source. http://git.eclipse.org/c/pde/eclipse.pde.ui.git/commit/?id=0d4293ba96d71403880c18fdb36624a8e971b117 I assume this is a separate issue, but the other test failures are because the source bundles have a different structure. For example, org.eclipse.jdt.debug.source puts the source at the root of the jar whereas in PDE built eclipse they are in folders named after the library the source belongs to (jdimodelsrc, jdisrc). This shouldn't cause problems for JDT because it is very good at tracking down where the package fragment roots are. However, when PDE does a plug-in import we need to recognize the folder names to create a source folder for each library. (In reply to comment #5) > I assume this is a separate issue, but the other test failures are because > the source bundles have a different structure. For example, > org.eclipse.jdt.debug.source puts the source at the root of the jar whereas > in PDE built eclipse they are in folders named after the library the source > belongs to (jdimodelsrc, jdisrc). > > This shouldn't cause problems for JDT because it is very good at tracking > down where the package fragment roots are. However, when PDE does a plug-in > import we need to recognize the folder names to create a source folder for > each library. If the source bundles tycho is producing cannot be imported by PDE, then please open another releng bug about that and then we'll open a tycho bug. PW (In reply to comment #6) > If the source bundles tycho is producing cannot be imported by PDE, then > please open another releng bug about that and then we'll open a tycho bug. > > PW See Bug 400740 (In reply to comment #2) > AFAIK tycho doesn't produce source bundles for the branding ones as they > have no source in them. I thought we had a bug where we acknowledged this > already. bug 401890 If I understand this right, regardless of "previous decision", the desire is that branding bundles do have source. There are two uses of "source". One that the debugger can find and make use of it during debugging. The second, it that PDE can "import source" so that users can see what the source it. Correct? (In reply to comment #9) > If I understand this right, regardless of "previous decision", the desire is > that branding bundles do have source. > > There are two uses of "source". One that the debugger can find and make use > of it during debugging. > > The second, it that PDE can "import source" so that users can see what the > source it. > > Correct? Yes, those bundles need to be present. I've targeted 4.2.2+, since this should also be fixed there. I don't understand the use case where importing the source of branding plugins has any value. If you want to do anything useful you will need to import the source from Git anyway. Is the main problem that it makes our metadata inconsistent because the SDK lists a plugin that is missing from the build? (In reply to comment #11) > I don't understand the use case where importing the source of branding > plugins has any value. If you want to do anything useful you will need to > import the source from Git anyway. Is the main problem that it makes our > metadata inconsistent because the SDK lists a plugin that is missing from > the build? I don't think there is any technical problem ... at least from my point of view. From my "casual user" point of view, I have in the past, just been exploring, and wanted to take a quick peek at something, not "do anything useful", and the branding bundles all sound so important and central, ... I guess because of their short names ... org.eclipse.cvs org.eclipse.jdt I'd often want to pick one and import the source just to see what it was. And, admittedly usually disappointed to learn it was just a branding bundle :) I personally do not have a strong preference one way or the other. My comment 9 was meant to help drive this issue to closure. (In reply to comment #12) in case you want source bundles generated for bundles with resources only, just define a src.includes in build.properties Looks like some clarification is needed here: the missing bundles are *not* source bundles for the branding bundles. Instead, they are the branding bundles for the source features. Example: feature org.eclipse.jdt has org.eclipse.jdt as branding plug-in feature org.eclipse.jdt.source has org.eclipse.jdt.source as branding plug-in The latter is currently missing from our builds. (In reply to comment #14) > Looks like some clarification is needed here: the missing bundles are *not* > source bundles for the branding bundles. Instead, they are the branding > bundles for the source features. Ah! That makes much more sense. Sorry for confusion. (In reply to comment #14) > Looks like some clarification is needed here: the missing bundles are *not* > source bundles for the branding bundles. Instead, they are the branding > bundles for the source features. > > Example: > feature org.eclipse.jdt has org.eclipse.jdt as branding plug-in > feature org.eclipse.jdt.source has org.eclipse.jdt.source as branding plug-in > > The latter is currently missing from our builds. found related bug 379415 and I think I finally understood why plugins org.eclipse.jdt.source and org.eclipse.pde.source are missing: These plugins used to be generated using the "sourceTemplatePlugin" folder mechanism [1,2] by PDE headless build (docs see [3]). Tycho does not support sourceTemplatePlugin folders. The same effect can mostly be achieved simply by specifying src.includes in the bundle. However there is a problem if both binary and source bundle should include the same file paths, such as about.html, but with differing content. Opened tycho bug 407172 for this. [1] http://git.eclipse.org/c/pde/eclipse.pde.git/tree/org.eclipse.pde-feature [2] http://git.eclipse.org/c/jdt/eclipse.jdt.git/tree/org.eclipse.jdt-feature [3] http://help.eclipse.org/juno/index.jsp?topic=/org.eclipse.pde.doc.user/tasks/pde_individual_source.htm (In reply to comment #14) > Looks like some clarification is needed here: the missing bundles are *not* > source bundles for the branding bundles. Instead, they are the branding > bundles for the source features. > > Example: > feature org.eclipse.jdt has org.eclipse.jdt as branding plug-in > feature org.eclipse.jdt.source has org.eclipse.jdt.source as branding plug-in > > The latter is currently missing from our builds. I was investigating this today, and I think you are wrong about this. org.eclipse.jdt.source is not the branding plugin for the org.eclipse.jdt.source feature. It is (or was) the source bundle for the bundle org.eclipse.jdt. You can see this by looking at its MANIFEST.MF in Eclipse 4.2.2: Eclipse-SourceBundle: org.eclipse.jdt;version="3.8.1.v201302041200" That header means it is a source bundle, not a branding bundle. It is still missing, but I'm not sure it is critical. It contains all the same information as the org.eclipse.jdt bundle itself and doesn't add any value that I can see. Changing back to original title. (In reply to comment #17) You're right, I got confused when looking at the other branding bug. And I agree that if we miss those bundles, it's not a big deal. Created attachment 231147 [details]
generate source bundle for org.eclipse.jdt branding bundle
Here is how to generate the source bundle for the org.eclipse.jdt branding bundle.
Other branding bundles will be similar I guess.
(In reply to comment #20) > Created attachment 231147 [details] > generate source bundle for org.eclipse.jdt branding bundle > > Here is how to generate the source bundle for the org.eclipse.jdt branding > bundle. > Other branding bundles will be similar I guess. Jan, is this fix dependent on some recent fix in 0.18.0-SNAPSHOT? Or, just something we've been missing all along? (In reply to comment #21) > (In reply to comment #20) > > Created attachment 231147 [details] > > generate source bundle for org.eclipse.jdt branding bundle > > > > Here is how to generate the source bundle for the org.eclipse.jdt branding > > bundle. > > Other branding bundles will be similar I guess. > > Jan, is this fix dependent on some recent fix in 0.18.0-SNAPSHOT? Or, just > something we've been missing all along? More specifically, I didn't think "sourceTemplatePlugin" was supported. Or, am I confusing that with "sourceTemplateFeature" not supported? Just wondering if this type of fix helps us with bug 406868. (In reply to comment #22) > > Jan, is this fix dependent on some recent fix in 0.18.0-SNAPSHOT? Or, just > > something we've been missing all along? it depends on the fix for tycho bug 407172 done in 0.18.0-SNAPSHOT > More specifically, I didn't think "sourceTemplatePlugin" was supported. > Or, am I confusing that with "sourceTemplateFeature" not supported? Just > wondering if this type of fix helps us with bug 406868. there is no 1:1 sourceTemplatePlugin mechanism with "magic" folder names on feature level as it used to work in PDE headless build. However the fix for bug 407172 allows to effectively get the same result as far as I understood the old PDE build behaviour. Is there smth still pending here or we can close this one? Consider it done. |