I agree that it is desirable to minimize the number of "must do" rules and
those that are there should be enforced, but a "should do" regarding source
bundles would do a lot for projects who are frankly uncertain as to what
they should do in this area.

 

Thanks,

 

- Konstantin

 

 

From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Ian Bull
Sent: Thursday, August 08, 2013 9:14 AM
To: Cross project issues
Subject: Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Source code in simrel aggregate repo

 

Konstantin,

 

I don't think there were specific arguments against contributing source
bundles -- we generally agreed that source bundles are a "good thing". The
arguments were that the Planning Council should not make this a requirement
of the train. Overall there has been a movement to reduce the process at
Eclipse, and each "must do" should be taken very seriously. In the case of
the release train, what is the consequence of not doing this: Do we kick
them off the train? What if they have a good reason? What if it doesn't make
sense in their particular case? What if the bundle source-header is more
appropriate?

 

Instead of trying to legislate this, we decided that each project should do
what's right for them. 

 

I also brought this up on the AC today, and there was agreement there that
projects should be encouraged to provide source bundles, but not mandated.

 

Cheers,

Ian

 

 

 

On Thu, Aug 8, 2013 at 8:08 AM, Konstantin Komissarchik
<[email protected]> wrote:

Thanks for the summary. I would be curious to know what the arguments
against contributing source were. It seems to me that the status quo has led
to inconsistency, an antithesis to the point of having a common repository.

 

- Konstantin

 

 

 

From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of David M
Williams
Sent: Wednesday, August 07, 2013 11:39 PM


To: Cross project issues
Subject: Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Source code in simrel aggregate repo

 

Since I promised ... just to close the loop on this (my part of the loop,
anyway), the Planning Council decided the "status quo" was adequate as far
as Planning Council was concerned ... that is, we won't say one way or the
other and will continue to let each project decide exactly what to
contribute to common repository ... based, as usual, on their interaction,
requests, and feedback, with their community and adopters, and their other
priorities. 

Good luck and thanks, 




From:        "Konstantin Komissarchik" <[email protected]> 
To:        "'Cross project issues'" <[email protected]>, 
Date:        08/01/2013 05:04 PM 
Subject:        Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Source code in simrel
aggregate repo 
Sent by:        [email protected] 

  _____  




Thanks, David. When thinking about plugin developers, I find it is useful to
further divide that group into those working on eclipse.org projects and the
rest. Those working on eclipse.org projects, especially those also
participating in the simultaneous release, need to track integration builds
of their dependencies, know where those come from, etc. The rest could
certainly benefit from being able to get everything they need (including
source) from the simultaneous release repo. 
  
I will start opening bugs for projects that don't contribute source as I
need it for the Ultimate Edition. Let me know if the Planning Council needs
further input from me on this topic. 
  
Thanks, 
  
- Konstantin 
  
  
From: [email protected] [
<mailto:[email protected]>
mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of David M
Williams
Sent: Thursday, August 01, 2013 1:42 PM
To: Cross project issues
Subject: Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Source code in simrel aggregate repo

  
I'll add to Planning Council Agenda, but you might "work you point of view"
through your Planning Council rep ... with a specific proposal. I'm not sure
"EPP" vs. "Common Repo" changes that much (just in my opinion) since the
common repo has been seen as primarily for "end users" (granted, some end
users are "developers of plugins") so it'd be nice to have concise clear
statement of what projects "should do", in general. But, yes, you (anyone)
can always ask specific projects to do it differently ... we have no
prohibition against it. I know for WTP, many years ago, it was decided not
to include source, simply because it was felt developers "knew how to get
the source" from WTP's project and no reason to burden everyone else with
it. [And, believe me, the Planning Council has discussed many times and
could never even come up with a good definition of "SDK" :)  ... well, you
know, one that applied to all Eclipse projects.]. 

This history is one of the reasons we (me especially) recommend people do
not "build against" the common repo ... but, instead build against each
individual project they want ... but I know that advise usually goes
unheeded (but was happy when I once saw you give the same advice :) 

Thanks for your efforts, 




From:        "Konstantin Komissarchik" <
<mailto:[email protected]>
[email protected]> 
To:        "'Cross project issues'" <
<mailto:[email protected]>
[email protected]>, 
Date:        08/01/2013 02:18 PM 
Subject:        Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Source code in simrel
aggregate repo 
Sent by:         <mailto:[email protected]>
[email protected] 

  _____  





I suspect that what has happened in at least some of the cases is that the
requirements of the corresponding EPP package drove what was contributed to
the simrel repository. A natural effect, but not ideal, since the user base
for the simrel repo is more diverse in their requirements. 
 
Should this continue to be at project's discretion or should contributing
source to simrel repo be a requirement? I doubt that projects would object
to contributing source if asked, but maybe it would be better spelled out up
front. 
 
- Konstantin 
 
 
From:  <mailto:[email protected]>
[email protected] [
<mailto:[email protected]>
mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of David M
Williams
Sent: Thursday, August 01, 2013 10:50 AM
To: Cross project issues
Subject: Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Source code in simrel aggregate repo

 
This has always been viewed to be the contributing project's decision.
(Which ... is true in general ... some projects do not contribute ALL their
features to common repo; such as perhaps not examples, perhaps not some of
the rarer functions, etc.). I know for WTP, it was thought best to minimize
download (so no source ... last I knew), since it was intended for people
developing web apps ... not for people developing plugins for WTP. 

Hope that answers what you were asking. 





From:        "Konstantin Komissarchik" <
<mailto:[email protected]>
[email protected]> 
To:        "'Cross project issues'" <
<mailto:[email protected]>
[email protected]>, 
Date:        08/01/2013 12:58 PM 
Subject:        [cross-project-issues-dev] Source code in simrel aggregate
repo 
Sent by:         <mailto:[email protected]>
[email protected] 

  _____  






As part of working on the definition for Eclipse Ultimate Edition, I have
discovered that a number of prominent projects do not contribute source to
the simrel repo. Before I start opening bugs, is there prior context or
discussion on whether or not source code should be in the simrel repo? Note
that I am not asking whether source code should be in a particular package
as that's dependent on the user that the package is targeting. 

Thanks, 

- Konstantin_______________________________________________
cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
 <mailto:[email protected]>
[email protected]
 <https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev>
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev___________
____________________________________
cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
 <mailto:[email protected]>
[email protected]
 <https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev>
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev___________
____________________________________
cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
[email protected]
 <https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev>
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev


_______________________________________________
cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev





 

-- 
R. Ian Bull | EclipseSource Victoria | +1 250 477 7484
http://eclipsesource.com | http://twitter.com/eclipsesource 

_______________________________________________
cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev

Reply via email to