| Re: [epsilon-dev] Proposal to remove easymock 3.1, nodep 2.1.3 and objenesis 1.0 |
Hi Dimitris, To be clear, does “archive” mean “delete”? Or is there a procedure for dealing with this? Perhaps moving it to the “legacy” folder if we decide not to delete that as well. Presumably if there haven’t been any changes made to Concordance since 1.5, there’d be no harm in deleting it, since we still have the source code, JARs, plugins, features etc. from previous versions. Thanks, Sina From: Dimitris Kolovos Hi Sina, As there haven't been any responses re Concordance over the last couple of weeks, I think we should go ahead and archive it. If some of its functionality becomes of interest to Hawk in the future, we can extract the relevant parts from the repo history. Thanks, Dimitris On Tue, 31 Mar 2020 at 19:11, Sina Madani <sinadoom@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hi Dimitris, > > > > Thank you for your input on this. I have now deleted these libraries. There were two versions of EasyMock: 2.4 and 3.1. It is 3.1 which was unused. I can confirm all tests are passing and mvn clean install working when deleting these three projects. > > I’m not familiar with Concordance or Hawk so I can’t help on that front. My initial reaction was that perhaps we could request to move Concordance to the Hawk project (if there is still interest in maintaining it) but I presume it’s not trivial to do from a maintenance and administrative / Eclipse paperwork perspective. > > > > Thanks, > > Sina > > > > ------------------------- > > Hi Sina, > > > > Many thanks for your continued efforts on tidying up Epsilon! > > > > An email from 2011 suggests that EasyMock was used before we switched > > to Mockito. The other two libraries seem to be dependencies of > > EasyMock so if everything still compiles and all tests pass after > > deleting these projects, we should definitely do it. > > > > Regarding Concordance, while its tests still pass, I recently gave it > > a spin after an enquiry from an industrial collaborator and, sadly, it > > didn't work as expected (it wouldn't update cross-references after > > moving model files across folders). I've filed a bug report for this > > [1] with a minimal example to reproduce. A few other issues were > > reported in 2017 [2-4], which we haven't really looked into. > > > > Given the overlap in functionality between Concordance and Hawk, and > > between the Epsilon and Hawk development teams, my motivation for > > spending time on Concordance is somewhat limited so unless someone > > else from the team would like to step up and look into these issues, > > I'd be in favour of archiving Concordance before the next release. > > > > Having said that, interestingly, it turns out that our collaborator's > > company has implemented an in-house solution for keeping > > cross-references in sync when models move within the workspace, which > > shows that this problem (which is not addressed by Hawk) is still > > relevant so there is still some value in Concordance if anyone is > > interested in taking the lead. > > > > Thanks, > > Dimitris > > > > [1] https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=561608 > > [2] https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=518364 > > [3] https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=518363 > > [4] https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=518360 > > -- Dimitris Kolovos Professor of Software Engineering Department of Computer Science University of York http://www.cs.york.ac.uk/~dkolovos EMAIL DISCLAIMER http://www.york.ac.uk/docs/disclaimer/email.htm |