[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
|
RE: [modeling-pmc] feedback on GMT web site
|
Ed,
That is exactly what we are doing at the moment. As described in the
previous mail, we are splitting oAW over several projects in EMP. Once we
are finished oAW will be a distribution outside eclipse. As you maybe
noticed documentation and downloads already moved to Eclipse a while ago.
And as our CQs finally make good progress we are able to move our code into
the different EMP projects. So we are definitely willing and we do our best
to achieve this ASAP. As I said, MWE has no pointers to oAW anymore (not in
the code, not on the Wiki, not in the documentation...) and the same will be
true for Xpand in the next few weeks.
The main reason for the pointer to the website has been the forum where we
try to help the community. For the same reasons the EMFT newsgroup is still
in Technology we haven't moved it to Eclipse yet. (It would be hard for
people to find old items). Nevertheless, we are answering the questions in
the EMP-newsgroups as well! But for sure, we can remove the link. I
personally do not care.
Best regards,
Bernd
Mit freundlichen Grüßen
Bernd Kolb
(b.kolb@xxxxxxxxxxx)
http://www.kolbware.de
--
KolbWare
(Beratung & Coaching)
Bernd Kolb
Franz-Marc Str. 35
89520 Heidenheim
Mobil: 0163/7321605
-----Original Message-----
From: modeling-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:modeling-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Ed Merks
Sent: Friday, October 19, 2007 9:43 PM
To: PMC members mailing list
Cc: 'Markus Voelter'; modeling-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx;
'ian.skerrett@xxxxxxxxxxx, PMC members mailing list'
Subject: RE: [modeling-pmc] feedback on GMT web site
Bernd,
By the same token, EMF started at com.ibm.etools.emf but you won't find
signs of that. The E in EMF even stood for e-tools. But when we moved it
to Eclipse, we stripped all that is IBM from it, except for the copyrights.
I think that's very important. Even if oAW is not a big corporate brand,
it at least gives the appearance of commercial interests being involved.
After all, folks do consulting under this brand. And of course we greatly
value your contributions. After all, GMF is making good use of Xpand!
It's the individuals making the contributions that we'd like to recognize;
their associated entities should play a secondary role at best. I'd like
to see Eclipse provide some type of "list of credits under help" where
contributors, committers, and their sponsoring affiliations could be
advertised. I think that would be the appropriate place for non-Eclipse
bands to appear. I think the oAW brand is only appropriate as an external
distro, like MyEclipse...
Ed Merks/Toronto/IBM@IBMCA
mailto: merks@xxxxxxxxxx
905-413-3265 (t/l 969)
"Bernd Kolb"
<b.kolb@kolbware.
de> To
Sent by: "'Richard Gronback'"
modeling-pmc-boun <richard.gronback@xxxxxxxxxxx>,
ces@xxxxxxxxxxx "'Ian Skerrett'"
<ian.skerrett@xxxxxxxxxxx>,
"'ian.skerrett@xxxxxxxxxxx,
10/19/2007 02:27 PMC members mailing list'"
PM <modeling-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx>,
"'Markus Voelter'"
<voelter@xxxxxxx>
Please respond to cc
PMC members
mailing list Subject
<modeling-pmc@ecl RE: [modeling-pmc] feedback on GMT
ipse.org> web site
Ian, Rich, Ed, Jean
openArchitectureWare has been a project which has started independent of
Eclipse and has been integrated into GMT at some point. Hence it does have
its own brand and a quite large community including a webpage with a forum
on it. Just to clarify, oAW is driven by individuals, not by a company.
Most
of the developers are not paid for what they do to oAW, at least not
directly. It is one of the purposes of GMT to provide a way of integrating
promising new or existing projects into the Eclipse universe.
However, we are aware that for openArchitectureWare this is a temporary
state: at the moment we are in the process of splitting oAW into several
pieces that will end up in various Eclipse Modeling project, dropping the
openArchitectureWare name in the process.
For example, the process has been finished for the Modeling Workflow Engine
(MWE) which can now be found in EMFT and is being removed from
openArchitectureWare. If you have a look at the code and the documentation
you?ll find no references to openArchitectureWare anymore. The same will be
true for our Xpand contribution to the model-to-text component; it is
currently in the process of being migrated to M2T.
After we finished this process, openArchitectureWare will be much less
important. Our goal is to keep the "brand" oAW as a kind of "distribution"
of well-cooperating Eclipse modeling components, combined with a set of
more
experimental modeling related tools. We hope to finish this process within
the next few weeks.
I'd just want to make one remark w/r/t the branding of components. I think
the modeling project is different from the rest of the Eclipse projects.
Here we have e.g. a project called Model-to-model. It contains several
languages (components), basically doing the same. It is ok to have these
different languages with the same functionality. However, it is important
to
show the user when he should/could use which component. Thus, in EMP
components are much more independent from each other than in all other
Eclipse projects. I think it is good here to have a little branding (within
a limited range, I agree) which gives these components an identity. And
helps the users to distinguish them
Best regards,
Bernd
Mit freundlichen Grüßen
Bernd Kolb
(b.kolb@xxxxxxxxxxx)
http://www.kolbware.de
--
KolbWare
(Beratung & Coaching)
Bernd Kolb
Franz-Marc Str. 35
89520 Heidenheim
Mobil: 0163/7321605
From: Richard Gronback [mailto:richard.gronback@xxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Friday, October 19, 2007 7:40 PM
To: Ian Skerrett; ian.skerrett@xxxxxxxxxxx, PMC members mailing list; Bernd
Kolb; Markus Voelter
Subject: Re: [modeling-pmc] feedback on GMT web site
Thanks for the ATL observation, Ian. I was under the impression that our
?identity crisis? components were all within GMT. ATL has graduated from
GMT recently, as have several components of oAW, but I see they still have
a
reference to the ATLAS Group on their page. This should be removed, along
with other references such as the Acknowledgement section at the bottom of
this page: http://www.eclipse.org/m2m/atl/usecases/webapp.modeling/ Of
course, the logos are not what you mean, right? We have lots of logos in
use within Modeling.
Until such time there is a policy for advertising external entities
(commercial, academic, or otherwise) on the Eclipse.org website, I agree
that all references should be removed. As Ed mentioned, you won?t find
links to IBM or Borland on the EMF or GMF sites.
Regarding oAW, we have had discussions with them and decided the most
painless approach was to require they strip their oAW identity when
graduating to other modeling projects, also as Ed mentioned. The Xpand and
Workflow components are undergoing a namespace refactoring as they migrate,
and we?ll make sure there are no oAW on the M2T and EMFT websites. We?ll
certainly try to speed up this process.
Another timely topic is the recent announcement of the oAW 4.2 release (
http://www.eclipse.org/gmt/oaw/news/index.php and
http://www.eclipse.org/gmt/oaw/download/). I don?t recall a release review
taking place for this component (or ever for GMT), and I see they are still
providing links to download from www.openarchitectureware.org on their
download page. Hopefully, we can correct this ASAP.
Thanks,
Rich
On 10/19/07 1:12 PM, "Ian Skerrett" <ian.skerrett@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
What I would suggest is that the components of GMT should not have a
logo/graphic and have a descriptive name not a nickname. I think this
would
go a long way to improving the situation. Btw, this goes for all the
modeling sub-projects, for instance
http://www.eclipse.org/m2m/atl/
