Re: [EGIT PATCH] Rename org.spearce.egit -> org.eclipse.egit

From: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
Date: Jun 18, 2009, 23:24 UTC
Message-ID: <20090618232431.GR11191@spearce.org>
In-Reply-To: <200906190120.29915.robin.rosenberg@dewire.com>

Robin Rosenberg <robin.rosenberg@dewire.com> wrote:

Show 21 quoted lines

> 
> Need an idea on how to proceed here. There is a problem related to updating
> plugins here. We have renamed feature with one unrenamed plugin. How
> to we avoid problem when switching from org.spearce to org.eclipse
> 
> One option is to release a v0.4.1 (which we should do anyway), which is the last
> version from master before the split. For technical reasons this will be
> a branch since the split occurred already.
> 
> That 0.4.1 feature should require jgit < 0.5. Then we jgit to v0.5 and
> make org.eclipse.egit require jgit >= 0.5
> 
> Having two EGit features will be confusing. You get two of everything. E.g.
> Team>Share will have two Git's to choose from, but you cannot tell which
> is which.
> 
> That said, having both could be a feature, since it (didn't really try it), would
> be possible to switch between new and old workspaces and get the plugin
> configured for that workspace. The wierdness make me suggest we do
> not do this. If we really want it we could choose to create a proxy plugin
> for attaching old workspaces to the new plugins.

Yikes. I didn't even consider this. My own workspaces freaked out at the change, but I just deleted the projects from the workspace, re-imported them, and re-attached them to the new team provider. I never even gave it a second thought.

You're right, we should have a better plan for existing deployments.

Its a good thing I didn't just shove this into the tree, even though it seemed simple on the surface. Too simple. :-)

I like the 0.5 cut to define jgit versions pre/post split. But I'm really not sure what to do about the rename on the EGit team provider for existing workspaces.

-- 
Shawn.