[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
Re: [tools-pmc] RE: [ve-dev] Contribution on VE with XML editor
|
Nick,
Parallel IP requires having a conforming incubating project and VE is not
an incubating so it can't take advantage of that. As we know from EMF,
the EMFT modules and the EMF modules coexist under the same parent. So a
"VET" project serves purely the purpose of conforming to the development
processes. Parallel IP for incubating components in any project would
certainly help eliminate what seems to have gotten rather silly, but until
that comes about (some of us are working on that), I think Philippe should
drive forward and try to cut short the long discussions folks will be
inclined to have; discussions that will likely stall progress for weeks to
come if not nipped in the bud...
Ed Merks/Toronto/IBM@IBMCA
mailto: merks@xxxxxxxxxx
905-413-3265 (t/l 969)
Nick
Boldt/Toronto/IBM
@IBMCA To
Sent by: "Tools PMC mailing list"
tools-pmc-bounces <tools-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx>
@eclipse.org cc
Subject
10/21/2007 02:45 [tools-pmc] RE: [ve-dev]
AM Contribution on VE with XML editor
Please respond to
Tools PMC mailing
list
<tools-pmc@eclips
e.org>
Sent from wrong address; resending.
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Nick Boldt <nickboldt@xxxxxxxxx >
Date: Oct 21, 2007 2:34 AM
Subject: Re: [tools-pmc] RE: [ve-dev] Contribution on VE with XML editor
To: pombredanne@xxxxxxxxx, Tools PMC mailing list < tools-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Please forgive the naivete' of this question, but why can't pieces of
incubating code live in the same repo as stable code?
Could you not just label the incubating bits with "Incubation" in their
feature.xml/manifest.mf files, in adherence to the incubation rules, and
package those features in a separate zip from the main VE SDK/runtime zips,
named too with "incubation" in the zip name, eg.,
ve-unstable-incubation-I20071021.zip ?
Why do we even need a separate project or component? Surely the addition of
new API or tools to an existing project or component can be done in that
project or component, especially if the new bits are versioned
appropriately with a 0.x.0 number instead of the higher # associated with
the previously-released stable stuff ?
Do please correct me if I'm way off base here. Just seems to me that the
above idea is way simpler than having to go thru a creation review and
later refactoring, which would in turn make it easier to get community
contributions flowing faster.
Oh, and if you DO need a technology incubator, wasn't
/cvsroot/technology/org.eclipse.soc/ created pretty much for this purpose?
Nick
On 10/21/07, Philippe Ombredanne <pombredanne@xxxxxxxxx > wrote:
Ladies and gentlemen:
You are the tools PMC, so I am asking for guidance.
The VE project is in recovery mode. I just want to find a solution (I
like the approach suggested by Jeff and Ed to have something like a tools
incubator) to welcome resonably quickly new committers which are joinning
with significant pieces of code that they have built on top of VE.
I consider that important for the project and I want to benefit from the
// ip process such as not to loose the fledgling momentum that is
building around VE.
In contrast to many other projects, this is an all volunteer project and
to bring in good souls fast (especially bring in good souls that come
with a significant piece of code) is important for VE.
Whatever the solution you pick is fine
Shall I:
a) start our own VE incubator
b) work so that we start a common tools incubator to incubate for all
tools projects
And if you consider that neither a or b is acceptable to you, that is
fine. I just need to know.
There are always alternatives. Sourceforge and Google are some of them.
Cordially
--
Cheers
Philippe
-----Original Message-----
From: Jeff McAffer [mailto:Jeff_McAffer@xxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Saturday, October 20, 2007 6:55 PM
To: Tools PMC mailing list
Cc: pombredanne@xxxxxxxxx; Tools PMC mailing list;
tools-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx; 'Discussions people developing code for
the Visual Editor project'
Subject: RE: [tools-pmc] RE: [ve-dev] Contribution on VE with XML editor
I don't follow this. the only thing that is an incubator is a subproject
(according to the current development process). so as Ed points out, the
question is whether to have a Tools Incubator project that has N
protentially largely unrelated components to incubate stuff for various
other Tools projects or to have N Tools projects each of which is an
incubator in its own right. The former is simpler from a process point
of view but perhaps less than optimal from a community point of view.
Jeff
Doug Schaefer <
DSchaefer@xxxxxxx>
Sent by:
tools-pmc-bounces@ec To
lipse.org Tools PMC mailing list <tools-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
>, pombredanne@xxxxxxxxx
cc
10/18/2007 11:20 AM tools-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx, "'Discussions
people developing code for the Visual Editor
project'" <ve-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Please respond to Subject
Tools PMC mailing RE: [tools-pmc] RE: [ve-dev] Contribution on
list < VE with XML editor
tools-pmc@eclipse.o
rg>
I agree. I'm not sure why the subproject would be an incubator. Why
couldn't
we just put the code in an incubator.
Doug Schaefer, QNX Software Systems
Eclipse CDT Project Lead, http://cdtdoug.blogspot.com
> -----Original Message-----
> From: tools-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:
tools-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx]
> On Behalf Of Ed Merks
> Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2007 6:00 AM
> To: pombredanne@xxxxxxxxx; Tools PMC mailing list
> Cc: 'Tools PMC mailing list'; tools-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx;
'Discussions
> people developing code for the Visual Editor project'
> Subject: RE: [tools-pmc] RE: [ve-dev] Contribution on VE with XML
editor
>
> Guys,
>
> It seems to be a sign of a dysfunctional process when everyone needs to
> create incubating subprojects effectively for no other reason than to
take
> advantage of parallel IP. It's just not clear who is being well
served
> by
> this additional organizational complexity. Note that for EMF we have
the
> EMFT project as its permanently incubating satellite project and that
all
> the components for EMFT live under /cvsroot/modeling/org.eclipse.emf
along
> with the components for EMF so it makes little real difference whether
> EMFT
> is a separate subproject or not. As such, I don't see that it makes
much
> difference whether Tools has multiple incubating subprojects or just
one.
>
>
> Ed Merks/Toronto/IBM@IBMCA
> mailto: merks@xxxxxxxxxx
> 905-413-3265 (t/l 969)
>
>
>
>
>
> "Philippe
> Ombredanne"
> <pombredanne@gmai
To
> l.com> "'Tools PMC mailing list'"
> Sent by: <tools-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> tools-pmc-bounces
cc
> @eclipse.org tools-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx,
> "'Discussions people developing
> code for the Visual Editor
> 10/17/2007 01:02 project'" <ve-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> AM
Subject
> RE: [tools-pmc] RE: [ve-dev]
> Contribution on VE with XML
editor
> Please respond to
> pombredanne@gmail
> .com; Please
> respond to
> Tools PMC mailing
> list
> <tools-pmc@eclips
> e.org>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Jeff wrote:
> >Sure would be good to have that parallel IP process extended to all
> projects ;-)
> +1 :-P
>
> As for getting a tools incubator, I agree I think we need one. It does
not
> make sense for a tools project to start its onw incubator just because
it
> can.
> It does not make sens not have to have the ability to incubate things
in
> tools, especially when those are tightly linked to a certain tools
> project.
>
> Note that web tools started theiur own incubator.
> Incubators are in, they are cool.
> Let's do one!
>
> --
> Cheers
> Philippe
> -----Original Message-----
> From: tools-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto: tools-pmc-
> bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx]
> On Behalf Of Jeff McAffer
> Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2007 9:35 PM
> To: Tools PMC mailing list
> Cc: Tools PMC mailing list; tools-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx;
'Discussions
> people developing code for the Visual Editor project'
> Subject: Re: [tools-pmc] RE: [ve-dev] Contribution on VE with XML
editor
>
>
> you would have to have a subproject in Technology as well. IMHO it
would
> be better to have one general Tools incubator subporject with N
> components
> than N Tech subprojects. Either solution is not great.
> Jeff
>
>
>
> Ed
> Merks/Toronto/I
> BM@IBMCA
> Sent by:
To
> tools-pmc-bounc Tools PMC mailing list <tools-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> es@xxxxxxxxxxx
cc
> Tools PMC mailing list <tools-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx>,
> tools-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx, "'Discussions
people
> 10/16/2007 developing code for the Visual Editor project'"
> 08:51 PM <ve-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>
Subject
> Re: [tools-pmc] RE: [ve-dev] Contribution on VE
> Please respond with XML editor
> to
> Tools PMC
> mailing list
> <tools-pmc@ecl
> ipse.org>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Jeff,
>
> Isn't that what the Technology project is for?! It seems almost
ironic
> for the Tools project to have a general purpose incubating subproject
> when
> the entire Technology project exists for this purpose...
>
>
> Ed Merks/Toronto/IBM@IBMCA
> mailto: merks@xxxxxxxxxx
> 905-413-3265 (t/l 969)
>
>
>
>
>
> Jeff
> McAffer/Ottawa/IB
> M@IBMCA
To
> Sent by: pombredanne@xxxxxxxxx, Tools PMC
> tools-pmc-bounces mailing list
> @eclipse.org <tools-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>
cc
> "'Tools PMC mailing list'"
> 10/16/2007 08:45 <tools-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx>,
> PM tools-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx,
> "'Discussions people developing
> code for the Visual Editor
> Please respond to project'" <ve-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Tools PMC mailing
Subject
> list Re: [tools-pmc] RE: [ve-dev]
> <tools-pmc@eclips Contribution on VE with XML
editor
> e.org>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> unfortunately the parallel IP process applies only to "Incubating
> Projects". VE is not incubating. It seems a bit extreme to set up a
new
> Tools project to incubate this work. So an interesting question is
> whether
> or not Tools should have a general "Incubator" as we do in the Eclipse
> TLP.
>
>
> Jeff
>
>
>
> "Philippe Ombredanne"
> <pombredanne@xxxxxxxxx>
> Sent by:
To
> tools-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx "'Discussions people developing
> g code for the Visual Editor
> project'" <ve-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>
cc
> 10/16/2007 06:46 PM "'Tools PMC mailing list'"
> <tools-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>
Subject
> Please respond to [tools-pmc] RE: [ve-dev]
> pombredanne@xxxxxxxxx; Contribution on VE with XML
editor
> Please respond to
> Tools PMC mailing list
> <tools-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Hi Yves:
> Welcome ! This is a great news.
> Your contributions are very much welcomed and I would love you join
the
> project and be a driving force for non-Java visual editing.
> Team, I had a good discussion with Yves on the phone and here is how
we
> could go at it:
> 1/ we need a VE incubator for that, so we can welcome new significant
> code
> contributions and benefit from the paralell IP process . Any thought
from
> the Tools PMC on how to do that?
> 2/ in the meantime Yves and I will work to prepare his contribution
(mini
> ip
> review, package/names space refactoring, notices, licenses etfc) and
when
> ready this will be posted in some public for everyone to review
> 3/ at that stage I'll be able to start an IPZilla CQ to get review and
> approval for that contribution
> 4/ then we can vote Yves in asa new committer
>
> The interesting things is :
> There are synergies possibilities with the proposed contribution from
> Cathy
> (the VE Groovy extensions)
> There have been request here and on the new group for XML focused VE
> extensions.
>
> Thoughts? Feedback?
>
>
> --
> Cheers
> Philippe
> http://easyeclipse.org - http://phpeclipse.net -
http://eclipse.org/atf -
> http://eclipse.org/vep - http://labs.jboss.org/drools/ -
> http://developer.mozilla.org/en/docs/XULRunner
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ve-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto: ve-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx]
On
> Behalf Of Yves YANG
> Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2007 1:36 PM
> To: ve-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [ve-dev] Contribution on VE with XML editor
>
>
> Hi All,
>
> I'm Yves YANG from Soyatec. I were the CTO of Omondo from 2002 and
early
> 2006 and built the key components in EclispeUML. In my new company
> Soyatec,
> I work in a project to edit UI in XML file on top of VE since Mai
2006.
> This
> product is on production now in our custosmer. We think it could be
> profitable for all users if we can contribute this kind of solution in
> Eclipse to promote the XML UI approach, instead of the Java
programming.
> Please let me know if you are interested.
>
> Best regards
> Yves YANG
>
> _______________________________________________
> tools-pmc mailing list
> tools-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-pmc
> _______________________________________________
> tools-pmc mailing list
> tools-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-pmc
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> tools-pmc mailing list
> tools-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-pmc
> _______________________________________________
> tools-pmc mailing list
> tools-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-pmc
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> tools-pmc mailing list
> tools-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-pmc
_______________________________________________
tools-pmc mailing list
tools-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-pmc
_______________________________________________
tools-pmc mailing list
tools-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-pmc
_______________________________________________
tools-pmc mailing list
tools-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-pmc