Yes, let us wait for the opinion of more learned and wise people here :-) .
Thanks,
Raj
Jeremy Whitlock wrote:
Raj,
That makes sense to me but I did have a method to my madness. The
idea
was that OpenEJB plugins will be single entities for simplicity. The WTP
support would be in one plugin while the other features, not yet decided
upon of course, would be in their own plugin structures. This is an
initial
"offering" to get us started. I do not have a problem refactoring to
make
it more Eclipse-like. Let's see what everyone else thinks. Besides,
right
now there is only one reference to a non-jst extension point and it
would be
crazy to create an extra plugin just for the server icon.
Take care,
Jeremy
On 2/13/07, Raj Saini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi Jeremy,
I was looking at the existing server plugins in Eclipse WTP. Should we
not have the similar structure as existing plugins?
Also, existing plugins in eclipse are under JST. Should we follow the
same convention for naming OpenEJB eclipse plugin?
Thanks,
Raj
