Sorry if this is obvious to others, but is this tool intended to be a "delivery" of the "e4/sdk" product? In the sense it has APIs and/or could be extended? Or it is intended for use only by "Eclipse committers" in making Eclipse IDE?
I ask since the "requirements" are quite a bit different for the two. If simply a "releng tool" it could be provided similar to how we deliver the "releng tools" from Platform (which provides copyright tools, and a validator for MANIFEST and POM versions (and some old cvs 'release' tools not used much these days). While the description is needs improvement, I think it's pretty clear it is not intended to provide API or be extended (therefore "compatibility", etc. is not considered that important ... we tell people to use the same version built with their dev. environment. But, if meant to be extendable, and provide API, etc, then there are higher criteria. I should add, it would be "hard" to "build with the SDK" because it depends on some emf components (such as emf.edit.ui?) which is not apart of the "base" EMF we get "early" from EMF. Hope these comments help inform the final decision. From: John Arthorne <[email protected]> To: E4 Project developer mailing list <[email protected]>, Date: 01/19/2014 11:11 AM Subject: Re: [e4-dev] e4 tools build moving to Luna? Sent by: [email protected] If parts of the e4 tools graduated into PDE, then all active contributors to those tools would be granted PDE commit rights as part of the graduation/restructuring. We did the same thing with commit rights on other parts of e4 that graduated into the platform. So I don't think commit rights will be a problem at all. It does of course require active committers to keep maintaining it wherever it ends up. John From: Lars Vogel <[email protected]> To: E4 Project developer mailing list <[email protected]>, Date: 01/18/2014 05:02 AM Subject: Re: [e4-dev] e4 tools build moving to Luna? Sent by: [email protected] I personally like that we can adjust the tooling as needed. PDE seems very inactive at the moment. But test, better Javadoc and fixing the outstanding bugs is good in general, no matter if the tools get officially released or not, so no need to hold such activities of. Best regards, Lars Am 18.01.2014 09:40 schrieb "Wim Jongman" <[email protected]>: There are things missing in the model editor and in the tooling in general. Most notably unit tests, javadoc and user documentation. We need to fix these before a release can be considered. I am also happy to join a dedicated team that tackles this. So that makes two. Who wants to join us? Regards, Wim _______________________________________________ e4-dev mailing list [email protected] https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/e4-dev _______________________________________________ e4-dev mailing list [email protected] https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/e4-dev _______________________________________________ e4-dev mailing list [email protected] https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/e4-dev
_______________________________________________ e4-dev mailing list [email protected] https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/e4-dev
