I'm also in. Great initiative. Cheers,
Wim On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 5:39 PM, Lars Vogel <[email protected]> wrote: > PMC (in person John Arthrone) suggested a conference call to discussion > options. I post the details once they are set. > > > > 2014-08-27 12:26 GMT+02:00 Lars Vogel <[email protected]>: > >> Sounds like we all happily agree so far. I send an email to the PMC >> mailing list asking for approval for this change. >> >> Best regards, Lars >> >> >> 2014-08-27 11:35 GMT+02:00 Olivier Prouvost <[email protected] >> >: >> >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> For me it is +10 ! This is a main step for the E4 success. >>> >>> Tell me if I can help. >>> >>> Olivier >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> <http://www.opcoach.com> >>> >>> Olivier Prouvost >>> <[email protected]?subject=Demande%20de%20renseignements> >>> >>> Formation et Expertise Eclipse <http://www.opcoach.com/> >>> >>> *Mobile : +33 (0)6 28 07 65 64 <%2B33%20%280%296%2028%2007%2065%2064>* >>> >>> [image: Member] >>> <http://www.eclipse.org/membership/showMember.php?member_id=987> >>> >>> >>> >>> Le 26 août 2014 à 21:42, Lars Vogel <[email protected]> a écrit : >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> I think the main issue people have with the e4 tools is that they cannot >>> install from directly from the update site of the Eclipse release. I >>> asked in the cross mailing list how the e4 tools can be part of the Mars >>> update site. >>> >>> Wayne explained that we would have to move the e4 tools to a new >>> project. Here is his explanation how to do it: >>> ---------------------------- >>> >>> To move the code out of the project, you need to do a restructuring >>> review. Restructuring reviews are relatively simple affairs that require >>> you describe (as concisely as possible) what needs to to change and why. >>> >>> To restructure by moving, you need a project to move the code into. >>> >>> This could be an existing project (e.g. PDT), or one that we create. If >>> a new project is required, then we need to do a proposal followed by a >>> creation review. We can combine the creation review with the restructuring >>> review. >>> >>> There's more here: >>> >>> >>> https://wiki.eclipse.org/Development_Resources/HOWTO/Restructuring_Reviews >>> >>> HTH, >>> >>> Wayne >>> >>> ------------------ >>> >>> If the active e4 committers and our users agree, I personally think we >>> should go ahead and create this structuring review. >>> >>> How do people think about this? Should we go ahead with this >>> restructuring review? >>> >>> Best regards, Lars >>> >>> P.S. I would be interesting to work on the restructuring review. >>> _______________________________________________ >>> e4-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/e4-dev >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> e4-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/e4-dev >>> >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > e4-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/e4-dev >
_______________________________________________ e4-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/e4-dev
