Skip to content

Project structure: FeatureExt#1

Open
Joseph-Bineesh wants to merge 20 commits into
eclipse-lsp4mp:mainfrom
Joseph-Bineesh:development
Open

Project structure: FeatureExt#1
Joseph-Bineesh wants to merge 20 commits into
eclipse-lsp4mp:mainfrom
Joseph-Bineesh:development

Conversation

@Joseph-Bineesh
Copy link
Copy Markdown

No description provided.

private String id;

public CodeActionData() {
this(null);
Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

do we need to improve this?

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Improve as in? This is a common file between 2 repos, so as of now, we are not intending to change the content of them, because migration itself would incur lot of changes.

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Add JavaDoc explaining this is shared code between repos and intentionally kept unchanged for migration purposes.

Export-Package: org.eclipse.jdtls.featureext.core,
org.eclipse.jdtls.featureext.core.logging,
org.eclipse.jdtls.featureext.commons.codeaction
Automatic-Module-Name: org.eclipse.jdtls.featureext.core
Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Dont we need

Require-Bundle: org.eclipse.core.runtime,
 org.eclipse.jdt.core,
 org.eclipse.jdt.ls.core 

here?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This can be add when we use it in the code base.

@@ -0,0 +1,270 @@
/*******************************************************************************
* Copyright (c) 2024 Eclipse Foundation and others.
Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Update copyright year to 2026

@@ -0,0 +1,45 @@
###############################################################################
# Copyright (c) 2024 Eclipse Foundation and others.
Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Update copyright year to 2026

@@ -0,0 +1,9 @@
/**
* Core package for JDT.LS feature extensions.
Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Should we add copyright for this class?

@@ -0,0 +1,16 @@
###############################################################################
# Copyright (c) 2024 Eclipse Foundation and others.
Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Update copyright year to 2026

@@ -0,0 +1,334 @@
/*******************************************************************************
* Copyright (c) 2024 Eclipse Foundation and others.
Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Update copyright year to 2026

private String id;

public CodeActionData() {
this(null);
Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Add JavaDoc explaining this is shared code between repos and intentionally kept unchanged for migration purposes.

public class FeatureExtLogger {

private static final String LOGGER_NAME = "org.eclipse.jdtls.featureext";
private static final Logger LOGGER = Logger.getLogger(LOGGER_NAME);
Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I read somewhere that using org.eclipse.core.runtime.ILog is better Eclipse integration instead of JUL

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants