There's no requirement in the EDP to remove the code in any
particular timeframe.
You can have code in your SCM that you don't build. You can have
bits that you build, but don't contribute to the simultaneous
release.
If you're distributing it via your downloads, you should include it
in your release reviews.
You can--if you choose--keep it around and just file it under "old".
Do what's best for the community :-)
Wayne
On 06/03/15 03:43 PM, Oberhuber, Martin
wrote:
We
can leave it around for the next 3 months I guess, but by
Mars I would expect it to be replaced.
Otherwise
I would feel like our goal of unification would not have
been reached.
We
can investigate to what extent the new view can be backward
compatible (chances are good I guess since they have common
heritage).
Thanks,
Martin
--
Martin Oberhuber,
SMTS / Product Owner – Development Tools,
Wind
River
direct
+43.662.457915.85 fax +43.662.457915.6
I
have one ask. Could you leave the old Terminals View
around? You can hide it by not putting it any categories
and drop it from sim rel, but I’m still using it in my
latest builds. And I imagine others are as well.
Hi
Greg, Doug, Wayne –
On
our side, we are ready for bringing the refactored TCF
Terminals View code from TCF into TM, as discussed
previously.
Before
we “Just commit the code” as you had proposed, I would
like to check again with Wayne whether a Restructuring
Review would be adviseable, for two reasons:
1.
Checking
the TCF IP Log, there have been contributions at least
from Max Weninger and Markus Schorn to the TCF
Terminals. Both work for Wind River (Member Agreement)
but are not committers: Do such IP Log Entries need to
get moved to the new project ? How ? Would the GIT
history do that automatically ?
https://www.eclipse.org/projects/ip_log.php?projectid=tools.cdt.tcf
2.
We
need to also move the Bugzilla Backlog for Terminals,
so looks like some help from Webmaster will be needed.
I
would appreciate if the three of you might get a
chance hooking up on this subject at EclipseCon and
coming up with advice.
That
reminds me, regarding the next steps for the proposed
“TM 4.0” GIT repository / component:
-
Bringing
o.e.remote to TM had been discussed. Is this going to
happen ? When ?
-
Creating
a separate git repo to hold “core components”
independent of RSE in TM had been discussed. Is this
going to happen ? When ?
Having
a small, fresh git repo as target for our restructured
code would probably make some things simpler.
Comments
? Thoughts ?
Thanks,
Martin
--
Martin Oberhuber,
SMTS / Product Owner – Development Tools, Wind
River
direct
+43.662.457915.85 fax +43.662.457915.6
+1.
It’s more an issue when you want to move committers
from one project to another. Since you’re committers
on both, just fire it over.
Having
just cleaned up my internal serial port/terminal
implementation to get back to the old Terminal View,
I got an appreciation of how simple the old view is
to extend and how the TCF Terminal integration was
more than doubled the size of the code. If we’re
going to go with that as our one terminal
implementation, I’d like to see how we can simplify
that.
I
also want to see a tighter integration with
o.e.remote. All the terminal types can be
implemented using remote services with the bonus
that they also support other UI elements. With my
user hat on, I’m not sure why creating a Terminal
and opening a File Browser over the same wire would
require different frameworks. I just want to click
on my Connection in the Connections view and Open
Terminal or Open File Browser and the right things
happen. (And, yes, I’ll be adding a file browser
with full drag and drop to the o.e.remote UI
probably in the Mars.1 timeframe).
Is
a move review even necessary? I think this is
only for when whole projects move. In this case,
I think you could just create a Gerrit patch and
submit it to the TM repo.
Remaining
issues have been fixed, and the
refactored terminals view is now
available from our Marketplace
entry [1] as
well as directly from our p2
repository:
In
order to look at the source, you can
simply File > Import > Team >
Project set from this URL:
to
get all the necessary repos in one
step (TM, o.e.remote, TCF) with
projects categorized into Working
Sets.
We
now need to decide on the next steps to
ensure that we can align on this as
the common Terminals view for Eclipse.
If
a Move Review / Restructuring Review
is desired to move over the sources
into TM, we’d appreciate guidance from
Greg and Doug.
The
alternative would be just updating the
EPP packages to use the new terminals
view instead of the now deprecated
legacy one.
Comments
or thoughts are most welcome at this
point !
Martin Oberhuber,
SMTS / Product Owner – Development
Tools, Wind
River
direct
+43.662.457915.85 fax
+43.662.457915.6
Please
note that the proposed dependency
reduction for the “Terminals” view
implementation has been completed. If
you install the terminals feature from
our nightly build repository [1], you
want see any other o.e.tcf
feature/plug-in, nor will you get
GSON. The only external dependency the
“Terminals” view have is to
org.eclipse.cdt.core.native to support
the local terminal functionality. The
marketplace contribution will be
updated soon.
_______________________________________________
tm-dev mailing list
tm-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options,
retrieve your password, or unsubscribe
from this list, visit
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/tm-dev
--
Wayne Beaton on behalf of the Eclipse Management Organization
@waynebeaton
The Eclipse Foundation
|