Community
Participate
Working Groups
As was discussed during CBI meetup at eclipsecon last week, it probably makes senses to move org.eclipse.equinox.launcher* bundles and org.eclipse.equinox.executable feature from rt.equinox.framework git repository to rt.equinox.binaries repository. Doing so will eliminate the need for all/most PDE/Build custom callbacks and will make native launchers build much easier to migrate to CBI.
I think the launchers use a similar approach as SWT for binaries and code. Is there a similar bug opened for SWT?
bug 372794 The approach to build SWT is much more complicated than the launchers, that's why this one is being looked at first. PW
What do you think of this proposal? If this seems reasonable, Thanh, Igor, & I would be glad to help.
For clarity, please see Bug 370704 for the rationale for why we're asking for this.
(In reply to comment #3) > What do you think of this proposal? If this seems reasonable, Thanh, Igor, & I > would be glad to help. This seems reasonable to me. Silenio, Bogdan? Is the best way forward to create a new test repository where you move the necessary stuff from rt.equinox.binaries and rt.equinox.framework?
The reason SWT was split in two repos was because the binaries history is huge (over 200Mb) and most people (developers) just need the source code cloned (not the binaries). We build the SWT binaries at least once a week. I believe the launcher was split into two repos to be consistent with SWT. The launcher is not built as often, so the binary repo is much smaller. We just checked that rt.equinox.framework and rt.equinox.binaries together are around 70Mb. It is probably ok to merge them into one repo. Note that we probably will not do the same to SWT. Why do you want to move the source code into rt.equinox.binaries? Why not move the binaries back into rt.equinox.framework?
I'm wondering how this fits into long term plans? If ultimate goal is for CBI to "build everything" for LTS, then what would source/binary repos look like then? I'd assume there would not be a binary repo at that point? right? So ... just suggesting the really long term impact be considered ... not that I know what the right thing to do is.
There is one more consequence of staying with current approach - bug 386377.
Should it be closed now?
(In reply to Mykola Nikishov from comment #9) > Should it be closed now? I think the native source is still kept in the rt.equinox.framework repo for the launchers. It would be nice if we didn't need a biniaries repo at all and the binaries were compiled at build time instead of a separate step and pushed to the binaries repo.
Moving the launcher sources to binaries repo will not happen.
