Community
Participate
Working Groups
Duplicate of bug 296004 to be fixed in the EMF 2.4 maintenance branch. From that bug: I created the following two models Model A Model B Class A (ie. Catentry) Class B extends Class A (MyCompanyCatentry) Class C references Class B (XWarranty) When the 'binary compatible reflective methods' option is selected on genmodel B, the generated CImpl class has compilation errors. It makes reference to an offset constant that is never defined in the class.
Created attachment 153210 [details] Fix for 2.4.2 I've attached a backport of the fix to EMF 2.4.2.
The fix is committed to CVS for EMF 2.4.x maintenance.
It seems odd to fix this in the 2.4 stream but not the 2.5 stream. Do we ever do 2.4 builds? It appears not and in that case it seems pointless to make these changes without the associated builds that actually make them available to the community at large. For the future, I'd like to request that we make changes to maintenance streams if and only if we also publicly provide builds containing those changes. I also suggest that we make stream changes if and only if all streams between head and the stream with the fix have the same corresponding fix.
Hi Ed, As you no doubt know, any fixes I make in old streams are to support consumers within IBM, which is something I still need to do. I do builds to pick up these changes, but due to my perception of a lack of interest in them from outside of IBM, I haven't been promoting them. Because our builds are done on Eclipse.org infrastructure, they are as available to the community at large as they are to IBMers. If you think it's important to promote these builds, it's almost no additional effort, and I'm absolutely happy to do it. I just hit the promote button on the build with this change: http://www.eclipse.org/modeling/emf/downloads/?showAll=1&hlbuild=M200911261908&project=emf#M200911261908 No one is asking for this fix (or, apparently, any other fix) in 2.5. I've advocated committing all of our simple bug fixes to the 2.5 stream as well, but you don't have time and apparently the folks who pay my way don't think it's an important activity. As a result, we haven't published a single 2.5 maintenance build. For a while, I was keeping a list of bugs to do, in case anyone ever decided it was important, but that hasn't happened, and I've abandoned that list. If there was an active 2.5 maintenance stream, I'd be happy to commit these changes to it, but if there's no other reason to have one, I don't see how these three bug fixes constitute one.
That all sounds good. I'm happy with that. Thanks!
I'm glad! Thanks!
Fix available in R2_4_maintenance: 2.4.x.M200911261908.
