Hi David, yes, I am a representative of Xpand. And Karsten (Thoms) already formally announced the participation in another mail. Also Xpand has an aggrecon file, so I think we are fine.
Thank you! Sven 2016-12-16 15:28 GMT+01:00 David Williams <[email protected]>: > On 12/15/2016 08:56 AM, Sven Efftinge wrote: > >> >> Xpand is in maintenance mode, but I understood that it needs to be >> included if other projects have a dependency on it. >> In that case, I assume it is a viable option to just include last year's >> release again. >> Is that correct? >> >> That is correct. With some possible complications. > > Are you, Sven, saying to include Xpand as a representative of Xpand? If > so, then I think fine for you to include it, in your own ?.aggrcon file. My > guess is it would be best to also have a release record, even if it was not > a new release, just repeat the previously released version, and say > "maintenance mode, same version" as its release documentation. (But Wayne > is the authority on release records). > > I can envision a few other cases and one of those will get complicated: > > 1. In the past, projects wanted to "include" a previous release of a > project (or a few bundles) that was maintenance mode, and had no ?.aggrcon > file of their own (i.e. no one left to represent the project) so in those > cases the participating project "included" it, either directly via features > or by mirroring to their own repository. This is a direct analogy to "the > Orbit case". > > 2. The new case that might need some new procedure or policy: > If there is a large project, say like DTP (just as an example), which is > required by many, but has no one real representative, then technically it > should NOT be in its own ?.aggrcon file, and SOMEONE should say they will > include a copy of the previous release in their repository (or, in their > own ?.aggrcon file?) for themselves and others to use. That way, there is > always someone at least partially responsible for it if something goes > wrong. If nothing goes wrong, everything is fine. If something does go > wrong, SOMEONE has to do SOMETHING! (even if it is to decide "not to > include it"). > > I mention this last "special case" since it sounds like there are a number > of projects "in maintenance mode" and I suspect they will all "work" for a > while, but eventually, as I am sure you already know, they will no longer > work. Hence, a long term "ownership" is required, even for maintenance mode. > > Thanks, > > > > > _______________________________________________ > cross-project-issues-dev mailing list > [email protected] > To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe > from this list, visit > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev > -- Sven Efftinge TypeFox GmbH Am Germaniahafen 1 24143 Kiel Sitz: Kiel, Registergericht: Amtsgericht Kiel, HRB 17385 Managing Directors: Sven Efftinge, Moritz Eysholdt, Dr. Jan Köhnlein
_______________________________________________ cross-project-issues-dev mailing list [email protected] To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev
