![eclipse neon version number eclipse neon version number](https://slideplayer.com/slide/12967412/79/images/5/Eclipse+Packages+The+current+version+of+Eclipse+(4.6)+is+also+known+as+Neon.jpg)
![eclipse neon version number eclipse neon version number](https://www.researchgate.net/publication/319623561/figure/fig6/AS:567015564943365@1512198453575/Eclipse-Neon-for-development-of-JAVA-application.png)
Still a few things had to be settled, either by improving the tool, by fine tuning the input to the tool, or by some steps of post-processing the resulting Maven repo. That tool does a great job of extracting meta data from the p2 repo in order to create “meaningful” pom files, the key feature being: it copies all dependency information, which is originally authored in MANIFEST.MF, into corresponding declarations in the pom file.
![eclipse neon version number eclipse neon version number](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/Os4_aHFf8lI/maxresdefault.jpg)
One of its capabilities is to create a Maven repository (a dual use repo actually, but the p2 side of this is immaterial to this story). The main tool in this endeavour is the CBI aggregator, a model based tool for transforming p2 repositories in various ways. I should like to report some details of how our artifacts are mapped into the Maven world: The resulting “diversity” was one of my pet peeves in my job.Īt this point I decided to be the next volunteer who would screw up other people’s builds who would collaborate with the powers that be at to produce the official uploads to Maven Central.Īs of today, I can report that this dream has become reality, all relevant artifacts of Neon.2 that are produced by the Eclipse Project, are now “officially” available from Maven Central. Anybody who has ever studied the differences between Maven and OSGi (wrt dependencies and building that is) will immediately see that there are many possible ways to represent Eclipse artifacts (OSGi bundles) in a Maven pom. More stories like this and I realized that relying on Eclipse artifacts in Maven builds was always at the mercy of some volunteers, who typically don’t have a long-term relationship to Eclipse, who filled in a major gap by uploading individual Eclipse artifacts to Maven Central (thanks to you volunteers, please don’t take it personally: I’m happy that your work is no longer needed). Bottom line, with both almost-identical versions available, Maven couldn’t figure out what to do, maybe each was considered as worse than the other, to the effect that Maven simply failed to use either. Yes take a close look, there is a difference. Well, if it’s the same, what’s the buzz? It turned out it had a one-char difference in its version: instead of 1.2.3.v20140815 its version was 1.2.3-v20140815. So what? Well, that artifact was the same that we also had on our internal servers. Quite to the contrary somewhere on the wide internet (Maven Central to be precise) a new artifact had appeared. Followed long nights of searching why that artifact may have disappeared, but we reassured ourselves, nothing had disappeared. One Eclipse artifact could no longer be resolved.
Eclipse neon version number generator#
It doesn’t make a big difference if they are just invoking a code generator built using Xtext etc or whether some Eclipse technology should actually be included in their application runtime.Īmong many troubles, I recall one situation that really opened my eyes: one particular build had been running successfully for some time, until one day it was fubar. So whenever their build touches my technology we are facing a “challenge”.
![eclipse neon version number eclipse neon version number](https://sdtimes.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/0622.sdt-eclipse.jpeg)
Their build technology of choice is Maven (without tycho that is).
Eclipse neon version number software#
But those colleagues consuming my technology work on software that has no direct connection to Eclipse nor OSGi. In my job at GK Software I have the pleasure of developing technology based on Eclipse. It’s done, finally! Bidding farewell to my pet peeve