| Re: [gef-dev] GEF3 resurrection |
I agree that providing contributions is what should happen before any committer nomination. That is what the Eclipse process defines, and it especially makes sense for GEF-legacy, where a lot of complexity results from the backwards-compatibility constraints.As possible contributions will belong to something the project team has decided to no longer maintain, I do not expect much interest in supporting such contributions (at least I can definitely say this for myself, but the team should speak up so get some clear picture on it).Unless at least a subset of the existing committers pledges to support this in all required form, I would prefer to revive GEF-legacy in its own project scope, with clear responsibilities right from the start.Best Regards,AlexanderAm 22.02.2022 um 08:54 schrieb Miklossy, Tamas <miklossy@xxxxxxxxx>:I think the most profitable way would be if Serge and Alois would
prepare their enhancements as PR against the GEF3 repo.
If these are merged, there is enough to start a committer election for
both of them.I agree.Am Di., 22. Feb. 2022 um 06:51 Uhr schrieb Christoph Läubrich <laeubi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:I think the most profitable way would be if Serge and Alois would
prepare their enhancements as PR against the GEF3 repo.
If these are merged, there is enough to start a committer election for
both of them...
Beside that, also one could think about simply create a fork independent
from the GEF project and maybe later on propose it as a new eclipse
project...
Am 21.02.22 um 09:35 schrieb Lars Vogel:
> Hi Alexander,
>
> the expressed desire of Serge and Alois and myself to work on an
> abandoned part of a project. Both Serge and Alois maintained their own
> fork of GEF and have work based on GEF so I think they demonstrated
> their qualifications.
>
> AFAIK the Eclipse foundation allows other interested parties to get
> involved in abandoned parts of the software.
>
> Best regards, Lars
>
> On Mon, Feb 21, 2022 at 9:32 AM Alexander Nyßen <nyssen@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> Hallo Lars,
>>
>> what would be the basis for starting any such nominations?
>>
>> Best Regards,
>> Alexander
>>
>> Am 21.02.2022 um 09:29 schrieb Lars Vogel <lars.vogel@xxxxxxxxxxx>:
>>
>> Hi Matthias,
>>
>> I would prefer to start using the old repo and see if there is a need to split out later.
>>
>> Can you start with the nominations for Serge, Alois and potentially myself as committers?
>>
>> Best regards, Lars
>>
>>
>> Matthias Wienand <matthias.wienand@xxxxxxxxx> schrieb am Fr., 18. Feb. 2022, 15:57:
>>>
>>> Hi Serge,
>>>
>>> the simple solution for allowing you to bring your changes into GEF Legacy is to separate GEF Legacy into another Eclipse Project. But you or someone else would have to take over responsibility.
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>> Matthias
>>>
>>> On Fri, Feb 18, 2022 at 12:20 PM Serge Rider <serge@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi Matthias, Alexander, Lars,
>>>>
>>>> Honestly, I'd prefer not to be "in charge" (in any form) for GEF legacy.
>>>> Because I am not the best expert in the Eclipse platform ecosystem as a whole, I never participated in GEF development in the past.
>>>> I am not even an Eclipse committer yet, but I could try to become one.
>>>>
>>>> I (together with DBeaver team) would be happy to propose PRs with bug fixes and improvements.
>>>> I would be happy to participate in discussions about GEF developments and, hopefully, participate in GEF3/GEF5 transition process.
>>>>
>>>> However, I doubt that we can bring features of GEF5 into GEF3 (at least major features).
>>>> I think GEF3 API should remain the same for backward compatibility as there are hundreds of existing GEF3-based solutions. But it should be improved.
>>>> This is the main idea of my letter - return GEF3 to life to be able to fix bugs and provide minor UI or API improvements. We don't want to turn GEF3 into GEF5.
>>>>
>>>> Another idea is that we could try to add support of SWT-based UI rednering into GEF5. This will solve conceptual problems with GEF3->GEF5 migration.
>>>>
>>>> Briefly: the main thing we need now is a possibility to commit into GEF3 legacy repository and return GEF3 into release cycle.
>>>>
>>>> Best,
>>>> Serge
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Feb 17, 2022 at 3:29 PM Matthias Wienand <matthias.wienand@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hey,
>>>>>
>>>>> it is nice to see some action here :-)
>>>>>
>>>>> @Lars: Yes, I think that is the way to go. Thank you for offering your support with the uncomfortable stuff ;-) Maybe we need Serge and Alois to bring in a few contributions first, before we do an election, but I would also be fine with skipping directly to an election TBH.
>>>>>
>>>>> @Serge: It would be nice if you could try to answer Alexander's question "Do you plan to actively contribute to the GEF project as a whole, or do you just feel obliged to GEF-legacy?". I am also very interested in the answer.
>>>>> Of course, I would like to see you try to bring features from GEF 5 into an improved GEF 3 (the idea you touch on in the presentation, IIUC?).
>>>>>
>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>> Matthias
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Feb 17, 2022 at 10:19 AM Pierre-Charles David <pierre-charles.david@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Le 16/02/2022 à 17:11, Serge Rider a écrit :
>>>>>>> Hi Team!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I am from the DBeaver development team (https://dbeaver.io). We
>>>>>>> develop the universal database management tool based on the Eclipse
>>>>>>> RCP platform.
>>>>>>> Besides other Eclipse RCP extensions, we heavily rely on legacy
>>>>>>> GEF/draw2d.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I was a speaker on several recent Eclipse Cons, the last session was
>>>>>>> about legacy GEF adoption:
>>>>>>> https://www.eclipsecon.org/2021/sessions/diagrams-eclipse-rcp-back-future
>>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ZIUB2XFDLE
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> What we want is to resurrect GEF3 maintenance and include it back to
>>>>>>> the standard Eclipse RCP lifecycle.
>>>>>>> We have several PRs we'd like to merge in the codebase (currently we
>>>>>>> maintain all fixes in our forked repository on GitHub). We also want
>>>>>>> to propose legacy API improvements (keeping API backward
>>>>>>> compatibility) and several features.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This is great news, thanks for the initiative Serge! (Thanks for DBeaver
>>>>>> btw, I use it almost every day and it's a great tool).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As the maintainer of GMF Runtime, I'd like to remind that *a lot* of
>>>>>> projects depend on GEF Legacy (via GMF Runtime or not). In the SimRel
>>>>>> alone there's Graphiti, Sirius (and Capella, even if it's not in the
>>>>>> SimRel), Papyrus, Ecore Tools, and probably others.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Of course improvements would be welcome, and we (in GMF and Sirius) may
>>>>>> able to propose some fixes/improvements we've currently had to make in
>>>>>> our own copies of GEF classes like you, but care must be taken not to
>>>>>> break the many projects which depend on the current behavior (sometimes
>>>>>> in subtle ways).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>> Pierre-Charles David
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> gef-dev mailing list
>>>>>> gef-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/gef-dev
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> gef-dev mailing list
>>>>> gef-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
>>>>> To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/gef-dev
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> gef-dev mailing list
>>>> gef-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
>>>> To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/gef-dev
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> gef-dev mailing list
>>> gef-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
>>> To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/gef-dev
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> gef-dev mailing list
>> gef-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
>> To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/gef-dev
>>
>>
>>
>> Vorstand/Board: Jens Wagener (Vors./chairman), Dr. Stephan Eberle, Abdelghani El-Kacimi, Wolfgang Neuhaus, Franz-Josef Schuermann
>> Aufsichtsrat/Supervisory Board: Michael Neuhaus (Vors./chairman), Harald Goertz, Eric Swehla
>> Sitz der Gesellschaft/Registered Office: Am Brambusch 15-24, 44536 Lünen (Germany)
>> Registergericht/Registry Court: Amtsgericht Dortmund | HRB 20621
>> _______________________________________________
>> gef-dev mailing list
>> gef-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
>> To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/gef-dev
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
gef-dev mailing list
gef-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/gef-dev
--Tamás Miklóssy
M.Sc.-Inform.
IT-Berateritemis AGNiederlassung LünenAm Brambusch 1544536 LünenRechtlicher Hinweis:Amtsgericht Dortmund, HRB 20621Vorstand: Jens Wagener (Vors.), Wolfgang Neuhaus, Abdelghani El KacimiAufsichtsrat: Prof. Dr. Burkhard Igel (Vors.), Michael Neuhaus, Stephan Grollmann
Vorstand/Board: Jens Wagener (Vors./chairman), Dr. Stephan Eberle, Abdelghani El-Kacimi, Wolfgang Neuhaus, Franz-Josef SchuermannAufsichtsrat/Supervisory Board: Michael Neuhaus (Vors./chairman), Harald Goertz, Eric SwehlaSitz der Gesellschaft/Registered Office: Am Brambusch 15-24, 44536 Lünen (Germany)Registergericht/Registry Court: Amtsgericht Dortmund | HRB 20621_______________________________________________
gef-dev mailing list
gef-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/gef-dev
Vorstand/Board: Jens Wagener (Vors./chairman), Dr. Stephan Eberle, Abdelghani El-Kacimi, Wolfgang Neuhaus, Franz-Josef SchuermannAufsichtsrat/Supervisory Board: Michael Neuhaus (Vors./chairman), Harald Goertz, Eric SwehlaSitz der Gesellschaft/Registered Office: Am Brambusch 15-24, 44536 Lünen (Germany)Registergericht/Registry Court: Amtsgericht Dortmund | HRB 20621_______________________________________________
gef-dev mailing list
gef-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/gef-dev