Yes, this is a good point. Perhaps we can fast track any platform committers that want commit access to Equinox once it is a sub project of Eclipse.
Tom
----- Original message -----
From: "Daniel Megert" <daniel_megert@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sent by: eclipse-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
To: eclipse-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
Cc:
Subject: Re: [eclipse-pmc] Concerns Regarding Sub-Project Merege
Date: Sun, Jun 25, 2017 10:10 AM
Thanks Mike
That's another good point to keep it as (sub-) project in the PMI.
Dani
From: Mike Milinkovich <mike.milinkovich@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: eclipse-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
Date: 24.06.2017 11:14
Subject: Re: [eclipse-pmc] Concerns Regarding Sub-Project Merege
Sent by: eclipse-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
I would like to point out one other factor in this conversation: trademarks. Equinox is a well known name in the industry. Our default trademark policy is that we reserve project names as trademarks. If Equinox is no longer a project, we should do something special to continue to protect the brand.
This may apply to JDT and others as well, but I would have to think about that a little more.
Mike Milinkovich
mike.milinkovich@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
(m) +1.613.220.3223
Please note new email address.
On Jun 24, 2017, at 4:23 AM, Daniel Megert <daniel_megert@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
After sleeping over it, I'm not that sure anymore. Keeping it at the same level as Platform, JDT and PDE might be better, especially if we want to manage the Equinox releases in the PMI.
Dani
From: "Thomas Watson" <tjwatson@xxxxxxxxxx>
To: eclipse-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
Date: 23.06.2017 20:36
Subject: Re: [eclipse-pmc] Concerns Regarding Sub-Project Merege
Sent by: eclipse-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
That makes sense to me.
Tom
----- Original message -----
From: "Daniel Megert" <daniel_megert@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sent by: eclipse-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
To: eclipse-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
Cc:
Subject: Re: [eclipse-pmc] Concerns Regarding Sub-Project Merege
Date: Fri, Jun 23, 2017 10:31 AM
A Bugzilla Product does not have to match a project. I would add "Equinox" as product under Eclipse and just move over all components.
Dani
From: "Thomas Watson" <tjwatson@xxxxxxxxxx>
To: eclipse-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
Date: 23.06.2017 17:01
Subject: Re: [eclipse-pmc] Concerns Regarding Sub-Project Merege
Sent by: eclipse-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
The major thing needed is to be able to publish individual artifacts as released to maven central and be able to do that at a fine grained level. Equinox as many artifacts that can be consumed individually and our consumers would most like to consume them from maven central.
Perhaps the most simple way to do that now is to do the full build like we do today for the I-Build but only selectively publish to maven central the artifacts that should be included in a release?
Anyway, all these types of problems would need to be addressed in similar ways regardless of where the Equinox bundles reside. I just wanted to be sure merging Equinox into Platform did not inhibit our ability to accomplish this. My other concern is around things like bugzilla components. In equinox we have these bugzilla components that I would like to move over:
Compendium
Components
Framework
Launcher
p2
Security
Server-Side
Weaving
Will these fit well under the Platform product?
Tom
----- Original message -----
From: Aleksandar Kurtakov <akurtako@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sent by: eclipse-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
To: eclipse-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
Cc:
Subject: Re: [eclipse-pmc] Concerns Regarding Sub-Project Merege
Date: Fri, Jun 23, 2017 9:22 AM
On Fri, Jun 23, 2017 at 4:56 PM, Daniel Megert <daniel_megert@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi Tom
>
> Yes, the idea would be to merge it into Platform since Equinox is also weak
> on committers.
>
> The question regarding the releases is a good one. I've added Wayne to
> comment on that. Technically it is for sure not a problem as the Platform
> does the Equinox builds already. So, maybe we can do "Platform" releases
> that just contain Equinox.
Having more/faster Platform releases would help a lot IMHO. Even if
it's for few bugfixes or one new feature it's worth getting it to
users ASAP. But this is whole different discussion I would say.
Tom, one thing to think about more/faster Equinox releases is the
releng work as it is still not trivial enough to release the whole
platform and equinox doesn't have standalone procedure for now. I
would love to get the former being a no brainer but the later might be
easier to achieve if someone spends time on it.
Alex
>
> Dani
>
>
>
> From: "Thomas Watson" <tjwatson@xxxxxxxxxx>
> To: eclipse-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
> Date: 23.06.2017 15:45
>
> Subject: Re: [eclipse-pmc] Concerns Regarding Sub-Project Merege
> Sent by: eclipse-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
> ________________________________
>
>
>
> What is the proposal for Equinox in this new structure? I was under the
> impression that Equinox would sit beside Platform, PDE, JDT as its own sub
> project. Would Equinox instead be merged into Platform?
>
> One concern I have with that is our ability to do much more fine grained
> releases of individual artifacts (bundles). Other open source projects I am
> involved in do releases of their individual artifacts on demand instead of
> packaging them all together into one big coordinated release. I would love
> to move Equinox to such a model so we can iterate releases of individual
> bundles as needed. I don't have any firm idea on how to accomplish that
> right now, but would merging Equinox into Platform inhibit our ability to
> move in that direction?
>
> Tom
>
>
>
> ----- Original message -----
> From: "Daniel Megert" <daniel_megert@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent by: eclipse-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
> To: eclipse-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
> Cc:
> Subject: Re: [eclipse-pmc] Concerns Regarding Sub-Project Merege
> Date: Fri, Jun 23, 2017 3:53 AM
>
> Thanks everyone for the feedback on this topic. Some good additional
> arguments came up, and the vote is clearly to merge projects. As long as we
> keep the current responsibilities via owner or component lead concept (TBD),
> I'm also ready to merge. I'd like to keep the Platform separate from PDE and
> JDE though. Since PDE is already one project, I would merge the JDT
> sub-projects into JDT. That would give us Platform, JDT and PDE.
>
> I suggest we discuss the details in our next Tuesday's PMC call.
>
> Dani
>
>
>
> From: "Mike Wilson" <Mike_Wilson@xxxxxxxxxx>
> To: eclipse-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
> Date: 22.06.2017 19:34
> Subject: Re: [eclipse-pmc] Concerns Regarding Sub-Project Merege
> Sent by: eclipse-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
> ________________________________
>
>
>
>> it will most likely not help to bring in committers that can fix real
>> bugs...
>>
> Maybe. But even if I believe that, I also believe that it makes it easier
> for people to get to the point where they can fix real bugs.
>
> McQ.
>
> "Daniel Megert" ---2017/06/22 06:25:17---I neither wanted to use SWT as the
> argument nor say that doing general / basic fixes across sub-pro
>
> From: "Daniel Megert" <daniel_megert@xxxxxxxxxx>
> To: eclipse-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
> Date: 2017/06/22 06:25
> Subject: Re: [eclipse-pmc] Concerns Regarding Sub-Project Merege
> Sent by: eclipse-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
> ________________________________
>
>
>
> I neither wanted to use SWT as the argument nor say that doing general /
> basic fixes across sub-projects aren't good.
>
> My main point is that it will most likely not help to bring in committers
> that can fix real bugs, be it in SWT, Resources, Debug or any other
> sub-project.
>
> Dani
>
>
>
> From: Aleksandar Kurtakov <akurtako@xxxxxxxxxx>
> To: eclipse-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
> Date: 22.06.2017 12:15
> Subject: Re: [eclipse-pmc] Concerns Regarding Sub-Project Merege
> Sent by: eclipse-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
> ________________________________
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 22, 2017 at 1:12 PM, Aleksandar Kurtakov
> <akurtako@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On Thu, Jun 22, 2017 at 1:07 PM, Daniel Megert <daniel_megert@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> wrote:
>>> Yes, that can help contributors who do general / basic fixes in several
>>> sub-projects, but I challenge that we will get e.g. a new committer that
>>> can
>>> fix real SWT bugs.
>>
>> This could be true. But in no means it should prevent getting people
>> to fix team/ui/debug/ant...
>> It's a real strawman argument to use the non likely SWT committer
>> coming as an excuse to not merge.
>
> Further more - it's quite likely that new people will fix/improve
> snippets and/or tests and this still requires being SWT committer to
> push but doesn't require special knowledge about any WS.
>
> Alex
>
>>
>> Alex
>>
>>>
>>> Dani
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> From: Lars Vogel <lars.vogel@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> To: eclipse-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
>>> Date: 22.06.2017 11:43
>>>
>>> Subject: Re: [eclipse-pmc] Concerns Regarding Sub-Project Merege
>>> Sent by: eclipse-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
>>> ________________________________
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Resending the message regarding the fast track to get commit rights and
>>>> encourage committers to use it, will show us whether committers really
>>>> want
>>>> to get the additional power and also responsibility to work on a
>>>> component
>>>> that they have no clue about. If that number is high, I'd be more
>>>> encouraged
>>>> for a merge
>>>
>>> IMHO merging the platform project is primarily about making it easier
>>> to get new committer on board. At the moment is really hard for new
>>> people to gather enough commits (in one of our sub-projects) to get
>>> commit rights. Merging the projects would make that easier.
>>>
>>> Best regards, Lars
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jun 22, 2017 at 10:44 AM, Daniel Megert
>>> <daniel_megert@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>> It worked pretty well with regards to planning and triage.
>>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Dani
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> From: Aleksandar Kurtakov <akurtako@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>>> To: eclipse-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
>>>> Date: 21.06.2017 19:24
>>>>
>>>> Subject: Re: [eclipse-pmc] Concerns Regarding Sub-Project Merege
>>>> Sent by: eclipse-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
>>>> ________________________________
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Jun 21, 2017 at 8:15 PM, Daniel Megert
>>>> <daniel_megert@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> I'm still +1 for merging all platform projects together with Equinox
>>>>>> into one platform project.
>>>>>
>>>>>> All current leads should become co-leads for the new project, as we
>>>>>> discussed earlier.
>>>>>
>>>>> But how do you think the planning, sign-off, bug triage etc. works?
>>>>> Currently we can hold specific people accountable which got nominated
>>>>> by
>>>>> their peer committers. We would have to build a system/copy similar to
>>>>> what
>>>>> we have now, otherwise it won't be manageable.
>>>>
>>>> First, I would question how much it is working now esp. in regards of
>>>> planning and triaging. The sign-off is done by someone that's hold
>>>> accountable.
>>>> Please look at https://github.com/gcc-mirror/gcc/blob/master/MAINTAINERS
>>>> . We can come up with simplified way of this one and having Global
>>>> reviewers, OS/Port maintainers, and subsystems (one can even claim
>>>> specific maintainer for given bundle). And this is flexible and can be
>>>> changed by us on the go as it fits without going through the
>>>> bureacratics we are talking about now. If there is a will there is a
>>>> way :). Note that there is even "Write After Approval" group - these
>>>> people have write access but act accordingly and wait for their
>>>> reviews - I seriously believe that Eclipse committers are responsible
>>>> enough to be able to adhere to rules.
>>>>
>>>> Alex
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Dani
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> From: Lars Vogel <lars.vogel@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>> To: eclipse-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
>>>>> Date: 21.06.2017 17:05
>>>>> Subject: Re: [eclipse-pmc] Concerns Regarding Sub-Project Merege
>>>>> Sent by: eclipse-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
>>>>> ________________________________
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi Dani,
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm still +1 for merging all platform projects together with Equinox
>>>>> into one platform project.
>>>>>
>>>>> All current leads should become co-leads for the new project, as we
>>>>> discussed earlier.
>>>>>
>>>>> For PDE and JDT I have no strong feelings, IMHO we could leave them as
>>>>> separate projects.
>>>>>
>>>>> Maybe we could merge JDT core and JDT UI, there seems to be very
>>>>> little activity in JDT UI at the moment. Again, I have no strong
>>>>> feeling here, just a suggestion to simplify the setup in JDT.
>>>>>
>>>>> Best regards, Lars
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Jun 21, 2017 at 4:50 PM, Daniel Megert
>>>>> <daniel_megert@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> Dear Eclipse PMC Colleagues
>>>>>>
>>>>>> After thinking about this more and talking to my team I still have
>>>>>> strong
>>>>>> concerns to do that move. Here are some of them:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - All current (sub-) projects will be archived i.e. we and the
>>>>>> community
>>>>>> won't be able to find and learn about e.g. JDT in the PMI.
>>>>>> - There will only be one project with all committers. We would have to
>>>>>> copy/replicate all the details that we currently have in the
>>>>>> sub-projects
>>>>>> into that super project to keep users informed.
>>>>>> - Which people will lead that super project? One person can't do that.
>>>>>> Will
>>>>>> existing leads become co-leads? That would mean many leads and the
>>>>>> project
>>>>>> charter does not define the role of a main/super (co-) lead.
>>>>>> - Do we introduce the concept of components, i.e. do we replicate what
>>>>>> we
>>>>>> currently get by the PMI but not based on an official project charter?
>>>>>> If
>>>>>> so, we would have to define that and create web pages that show the
>>>>>> components and (co-) leads. Basically replicate what we currently
>>>>>> have,
>>>>>> except for the commit rights.
>>>>>> - My team was very unhappy when I informed them about this potential
>>>>>> change.
>>>>>> Putting code that's related to Platform UI together is one thing, but
>>>>>> opening up SWT, JDT and PDE to everyone caused very scary feelings
>>>>>> (also
>>>>>> for
>>>>>> me to be honest).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I would like to ask the PMC to reconsider this decision for now and
>>>>>> instead
>>>>>> resend the message that the PMC encourages a fast track for existing
>>>>>> committers to become a committer on another project
>>>>>> (https://dev.eclipse.org/mhonarc/lists/eclipse-dev/msg10305.html).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>> Dani
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> eclipse-pmc mailing list
>>>>>> eclipse-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
>>>>>> To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or
>>>>>> unsubscribe
>>>>>> from
>>>>>> this list, visit
>>>>>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse-pmc
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Eclipse Platform UI and e4 project co-lead
>>>>> CEO vogella GmbH
>>>>>
>>>>> Haindaalwisch 17a, 22395 Hamburg
>>>>> Amtsgericht Hamburg: HRB 127058
>>>>> Geschäftsführer: Lars Vogel, Jennifer Nerlich de Vogel
>>>>> USt-IdNr.: DE284122352
>>>>> Fax (040) 5247 6322, Email: lars.vogel@xxxxxxxxxxx, Web:
>>>>> http://www.vogella.com
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> eclipse-pmc mailing list
>>>>> eclipse-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
>>>>> To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe
>>>>> from
>>>>> this list, visit
>>>>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse-pmc
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> eclipse-pmc mailing list
>>>>> eclipse-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
>>>>> To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe
>>>>> from
>>>>> this list, visit
>>>>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse-pmc
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Alexander Kurtakov
>>>> Red Hat Eclipse Team
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> eclipse-pmc mailing list
>>>> eclipse-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
>>>> To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe
>>>> from
>>>> this list, visit
>>>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse-pmc
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> eclipse-pmc mailing list
>>>> eclipse-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
>>>> To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe
>>>> from
>>>> this list, visit
>>>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse-pmc
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Eclipse Platform UI and e4 project co-lead
>>> CEO vogella GmbH
>>>
>>> Haindaalwisch 17a, 22395 Hamburg
>>> Amtsgericht Hamburg: HRB 127058
>>> Geschäftsführer: Lars Vogel, Jennifer Nerlich de Vogel
>>> USt-IdNr.: DE284122352
>>> Fax (040) 5247 6322, Email: lars.vogel@xxxxxxxxxxx, Web:
>>> http://www.vogella.com
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> eclipse-pmc mailing list
>>> eclipse-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
>>> To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe
>>> from
>>> this list, visit
>>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse-pmc
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> eclipse-pmc mailing list
>>> eclipse-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
>>> To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe
>>> from
>>> this list, visit
>>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse-pmc
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Alexander Kurtakov
>> Red Hat Eclipse Team
>
>
>
> --
> Alexander Kurtakov
> Red Hat Eclipse Team
> _______________________________________________
> eclipse-pmc mailing list
> eclipse-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
> To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from
> this list, visit
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse-pmc
>
> _______________________________________________
> eclipse-pmc mailing list
> eclipse-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
> To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from
> this list, visit
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse-pmc
>
> [attachment "graycol.gif" deleted by Daniel Megert/Zurich/IBM]
> _______________________________________________
> eclipse-pmc mailing list
> eclipse-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
> To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from
> this list, visit
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse-pmc
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> eclipse-pmc mailing list
> eclipse-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
> To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from
> this list, visit
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse-pmc
>
> _______________________________________________
> eclipse-pmc mailing list
> eclipse-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
> To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from
> this list, visit
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse-pmc
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> eclipse-pmc mailing list
> eclipse-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
> To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from
> this list, visit
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse-pmc
--
Alexander Kurtakov
Red Hat Eclipse Team
_______________________________________________
eclipse-pmc mailing list
eclipse-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse-pmc
_______________________________________________
eclipse-pmc mailing list
eclipse-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse-pmc
_______________________________________________
eclipse-pmc mailing list
eclipse-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse-pmc
_______________________________________________
eclipse-pmc mailing list
eclipse-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse-pmc
_______________________________________________
eclipse-pmc mailing list
eclipse-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse-pmc_______________________________________________
eclipse-pmc mailing list
eclipse-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse-pmc
