Bugzilla – Full Text Bug Listing
| Summary: | Support <copyright>, <provider> and <description> in a product definition file (.product) | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Eclipse Project] Platform | Reporter: | David Williams <david_williams> | ||||||||
| Component: | Releng | Assignee: | David Williams <david_williams> | ||||||||
| Status: | RESOLVED FIXED | QA Contact: | |||||||||
| Severity: | normal | ||||||||||
| Priority: | P3 | CC: | aleksandr.kravets, bohacekm, curtis.windatt.public, d_a_carver, gschaffran, nboldt, pwebster, remy.suen, Vikas.Chandra, wayne.beaton | ||||||||
| Version: | 4.3 | ||||||||||
| Target Milestone: | 4.5 M6 | ||||||||||
| Hardware: | PC | ||||||||||
| OS: | Linux | ||||||||||
| Whiteboard: | |||||||||||
| Bug Depends on: | |||||||||||
| Bug Blocks: | 434596, 458776 | ||||||||||
| Attachments: |
|
||||||||||
|
Description
David Williams
I've done local tests putting following at end of p2.inf file and seemed to work fine. properties.1.name = org.eclipse.equinox.p2.description properties.1.value = Initial Mars Release of the Eclipse SDK. properties.2.name = org.eclipse.equinox.p2.provider properties.2.value = Eclipse.org (In reply to David Williams from comment #1) > I've done local tests putting following at end of p2.inf file and seemed to > work fine. > > > properties.1.name = org.eclipse.equinox.p2.description > properties.1.value = Initial Mars Release of the Eclipse SDK. > > properties.2.name = org.eclipse.equinox.p2.provider > properties.2.value = Eclipse.org FWIW, for the "binary Platform", I plan to say Initial Mars Release of the Eclipse Platform. And for Platform SDK, Initial Mars Release of the Eclipse Platform SDK. I've tried several "quick fixes" for copyright, but, could not get that to work. I'm sure there is a way ... but ... the description, and provider, I believe takes care of "80%" of the problem, and I would recommend not to worry about the other 20% unless/until it's fixed in PDE, Tycho, and/or P2. To better describe the background, and reason why this is important ... rather than make everyone read all the associated bugs, I'll summarize here. The motivation comes from "products" such as EPP, which bases their own product on the Eclipse Platform binary product. For one, when we had the recent "SR1a Security Release" one user was critical enough to write a blog about being "surprised" by an off-cycle release, and was unable to find any information about it. Our "release train" has become _so_ predictable I can see why someone would think twice about blindly installing something off-cycle, without any "description" or explanation. From a users point of view, the very initial description is blank, even though if they press "next", they did get some description (when using the pure SDK or Platform ... not sure about EPP). So, that "description in the middle of things" doesn't help someone who has mis-giving from the very start. I will attach screen shots of showing these, for "SDK". The other issue, where no "provider" is given, is especially noticeable in EPP packages, since then "Eclipse Platform" is in the middle of a long list, instead of the first item in a very short list. Will attach screen shot from EPP package. Created attachment 250424 [details] EPP JEE update first page FWIW, the blog post was FYI, link to blog was http://jdevelopment.nl/mysterious-44120150109-eclipse-luna-update-sr1a/ = = = = = Attachment shows first page of JEE EPP "update" to SR1, showing blank description, as "Platform" would be too. Created attachment 250425 [details] JEE second page, still blank description Confirmed for EPP, even the second page of dialog is blank, whereas for "pure platform" we do have a description: "An update for 4.x generation Eclipse SDK." This is provided by the following snippet in our *.p2.inf files: # Restrict range so we are not an automatic update for 3.x. update.id = org.eclipse.platform.ide update.range = [4.0,$version$) update.severity = 0 update.description = An update for 4.x generation Eclipse SDK. # Set the product property type properties.0.name = org.eclipse.equinox.p2.type.product properties.0.value = true See http://git.eclipse.org/c/platform/eclipse.platform.releng.aggregator.git/tree/eclipse.platform.releng.tychoeclipsebuilder/platform.sdk/platform.sdk.p2.inf#n42 (Guess we should correct "Eclipse SDK" to be "Platform" or "Platform SDK"). The previous part, in *.p2.inf, has existed since "forever". The new part, that adds "description" on first page, and provides "Provider", begins at http://git.eclipse.org/c/platform/eclipse.platform.releng.aggregator.git/tree/eclipse.platform.releng.tychoeclipsebuilder/platform.sdk/platform.sdk.p2.inf#n52 Created attachment 250426 [details]
Missing provider name
This last attachment shows how the lack of provider name really stands out, for "Eclipse SDK". There's actually two missing, one for Eclipse "product", and the other for "JEE Product" from EPP. We can at least fix ours, ... and provide an example of how EPP can fix theres.
This first commit show the main "fix" for this bug. http://git.eclipse.org/c/platform/eclipse.platform.releng.aggregator.git/commit/?id=64b81faf36fed8423301ac8d060146289c7f9392 Once that fix was done, it becomes obvious we should also fix the "update" description to match in names ... though, I suspect unlikely anyone ever sees those. http://git.eclipse.org/c/platform/eclipse.platform.releng.aggregator.git/commit/?id=051b651a8534d1a436962c24da2568f85b7136c1 With that, I'm closing as "fixed", but will emphasize I am totally open to different wording. I did avoid repeating the "version" in this description, since the way it is present to end user, the version is "right there" as well. |