I take that back. We have a fix that will allow the community to
test the CDT with the Windows gcc compilers. I need to do a new
build and submit it. Looks like that'll take an hour or so.
Sorry,
Doug.
From: Doug Schaefer <dschae...@qnx.com <mailto:dschae...@qnx.com>>
Reply-To: Cross project issues
<cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org
<mailto:cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org>>
Date: Wednesday, 9 May, 2012 3:58 PM
To: Cross project issues <cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org
<mailto:cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org>>
Subject: Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Status and outlook for M7
BTW, CDT is good to go. The next time the aggregator runs it'll
pick up our new build.
Cheers,
Doug.
From: Doug Schaefer <dschae...@qnx.com <mailto:dschae...@qnx.com>>
Reply-To: Cross project issues
<cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org
<mailto:cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org>>
Date: Wednesday, 9 May, 2012 12:13 PM
To: Cross project issues <cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org
<mailto:cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org>>
Subject: Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Status and outlook for M7
CDT is scrambling to fix some major issues. We may ask for more
time. Hopefully not.
Thanks,
Doug
From: David M Williams <david_willi...@us.ibm.com
<mailto:david_willi...@us.ibm.com>>
Reply-To: Cross project issues
<cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org
<mailto:cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org>>
Date: Wednesday, 9 May, 2012 12:11 PM
To: Cross project issues <cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org
<mailto:cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org>>
Subject: Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Status and outlook for M7
Reminder ... it is +3 day! 5 PM this evening (Eastern) will be
"cut-off" unless someone asks for a few extra hours.
I removed the emf compare feature from modeling category, since
it was cause build to fail. If there is some other one that's
supposed to be there, please add it back.
The following still have disabled repositories or features:
amp.b3aggrcon
equinox.b3aggrcon
jetty.b3aggrcon
mft.b3aggrcon
riena.b3aggrcon
virgo.b3aggrcon
Any word?
I can speak to the equinox one. See bug 378735[1]. It is related
to the org.eclipse.rcp.sdk.id
<http://org.eclipse.rcp.sdk.id/> "product". I _think_ I can add
it back for RC1. But is anyone using it? Can anyone document a
use case? It has not been working/available for all of Juno, so
far, and no one has really complained, and no one seems to have
a clear id of if or why its needed.
So, I know it'd be short notice to remove it ... but ... would
also appreciate someone clearly saying why its needed.
[1] https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=378735
<graycol.gif>David M Williams---05/09/2012 10:45:14 AM---Thanks
for replying. But, I'm a little confused, as the be current
aggregation builds are failing ou
From: David M Williams/Raleigh/IBM@IBMUS
To: laurent.gou...@obeo.fr <mailto:laurent.gou...@obeo.fr>,
Cross project issues <cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org
<mailto:cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org>>,
Date: 05/09/2012 10:45 AM
Subject: Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Status and outlook for M7
Sent by: cross-project-issues-dev-boun...@eclipse.org
<mailto:cross-project-issues-dev-boun...@eclipse.org>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for replying. But, I'm a little confused, as the be
current aggregation builds are failing out-of-the-gate saying
there is a problem with the model, at the emf.compare in the
"modeling category" does not refer to the right one. And,
apparently comes from several sources? (at least in past?) so
... is there supposed to be _any_ emf.compare in Juno? Or is it
completely gone? If the later, I'll just remove it from the
category. If the the former ... I'll have to hunt around for
which is "the right one" and use it (so, hoping someone knows
off the top of their head).
FYI, this can be seen by using the b3 aggregator editor,
selecting the top level "aggregation" note, and then running the
"validate" command from context menu. (Not even "validate
aggregation", just "validate" which just validates the XML and
EMF model).
Thanks,
Inactive hide details for Laurent Goubet ---05/09/2012 09:02:33
AM---Hi, Sorry about the delay before replying, May has a lot
oLaurent Goubet ---05/09/2012 09:02:33 AM---Hi, Sorry about the
delay before replying, May has a lot of holidays here :).
From: Laurent Goubet <laurent.gou...@obeo.fr
<mailto:laurent.gou...@obeo.fr>>
To: Cross project issues <cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org
<mailto:cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org>>,
Date: 05/09/2012 09:02 AM
Subject: Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Status and outlook for M7
Sent by: cross-project-issues-dev-boun...@eclipse.org
<mailto:cross-project-issues-dev-boun...@eclipse.org>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi,
Sorry about the delay before replying, May has a lot of holidays
here :).
emf-compare.b3aggrcon indeed had one repository "disabled"...
that was only a leftover from a previous milestone and did not
impact M7. We've removed that repository from the file.
Laurent Goubet
Obeo
On 06/05/2012 21:38, David M Williams wrote:
Yes ... its here, M7 week! And, I'm already giving status!
First thing to note it that we now have a stand-alone 4.2
primary build from the Eclipse Project, so for the first
time we have a pure and correct 4.2 repo. In the past, some
things from 3.8 were "slipping in" through aggregation due
to the way the platform was producing and partially
(unknowingly) combining 3.8 and 4.2. But no more, 4.2 only.
One impact of this, is the bundle
'org.eclipse.help.appserver' is no longer available ... it
was actually removed in 4.1, but it is being left in the 3.x
stream, even though 3.8 does not use it. It now correctly
does _not_ show up in 4.2 repo via aggregation.
And, this "broke" BIRT ... so, I disabled that, which
rippled across 3 or 4 others that depend on BIRT charting.
I hope BIRT can live without that old bundle and use the
jetty server now provided by the platform (and used by the
help system, in both 3.8 and 4.2). _
__http://git.eclipse.org/c/platform/eclipse.platform.common.git/plain/bundles/org.eclipse.platform.doc.isv/porting/4.2/incompatibilities.html?h=R4_HEAD#help-appserver_
Then there were the (fairly) usual breakages in RAP runtime
and Virgo based on assumptions on certain platform specific
versions, so I disabled those to get a green build, and
promote an initial M7 version to staging. Be sure to check
the reports (based on staging) to get as much cleaned up as
possible before M7: _
__http://build.eclipse.org/juno/simrel/reporeports/_
In all, the following files have disabled repositories or
features. It looks worse than it is, but we need to get in
completely "enabled" in the next few days (or, remove it, if
its some old thing that should not even be there any longer).
amp.b3aggrcon
birt.b3aggrcon
emf-compare.b3aggrcon
equinox.b3aggrcon
jetty.b3aggrcon
linuxtools.b3aggrcon
mat.b3aggrcon
mdt-papyrus.b3aggrcon
mft.b3aggrcon
rap.b3aggrcon
riena.b3aggrcon
scout.b3aggrcon
virgo.b3aggrcon
As always questions and clarifications are welcome.
Thanks everyone,
