Hi Tom, Sorry; I seem to have missed the earlier email. I'm +1 on your 3rd alternative of having top level projects for reviewed projects and an incubator for everything else.
Dave On Wed, May 6, 2009 at 3:38 AM, <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > Only 2 responses within one week not sure what that means. This is > really an important decision for the future of Nebula so I'm looking > forward to feedback from all active committers. > > Tom > > Tom Schindl schrieb: > > Hi Nebula-Community, > > > > This is the next part in my series on "The state and future for Nebula". > > The last mail was "It's all about the mission" and we came up with a new > > mission statement but only changing our mission is not enough because > > the changing the mission implies the project structure also changes. > > > > So this mail can be summerized with "It's all about project structure > > and release". > > > > There are 3 different possibilities to address the problem that we can't > > release stuff to the public make our mission statement reality: > > > > * Every widget has is its own eclipse project (L1) > > > > Nebula-Project > > + PShelf-Project (Stable - release 1.0) > > + Gallery-Project (Stable - release 1.1) > > + ... > > + MyComponent-Project (stable release 2.0) > > + MyComponent2-Project (Incubation - no release) > > > > * We split nebula in 2 Projects (L2) > > > > Nebula-Project (Stable - release 1.0) > > + PShelf > > + Gallery > > + MyComponent > > + ... > > + Nebula-Incubator-Project > > + MyComponent2 > > > > > > Both layouts have features and draw backs and we need to take a look at > > them in more detail: > > > > L1: > > - Administrative-Overhead for Widget-Creator is high > > - Administrative-Overhead for Eclipse-Foundation and Webmasters > > - High burden to bring in new widgets > > + Release flexibility for the widget owner > > > > L2: > > + No Administrative-Overhead for Widget-Creator > > + No Administrative-Overhead for Eclipse-Foundation and Webmasters > > - No individual releases by the widget owner > > > > Both layouts don't play well with our mission because if we want Eclipse > > Projects move their reuseable code to Nebula (like e.g. XViewer) they > > might have the need of individual releases and might decide to keep the > > code private to their project (On EclipseCon I talked with people from > > NatTable and this was something they would have a problem with). > > > > So in the last days I thought about those things and came up with the > > following project structure: > > > > Nebula-Project > > + PShelf-Project (Stable - release 1.0) > > + Gallery-Project (Stable - release 1.1) > > + ... > > + MyComponent-Project (Stable release 2.0) > > + Nebula-Incubator-Project > > + MyComponent2 > > > > Additionally I'd like to define a Nebula-Release-Train just like we have > > an Eclipse Release Train on the top-level project structure where we > > provide a concerted release of all Nebula-Widgets, an Update-Site, ... . > > > > We need to ask our PMC of course whether the above layout is supported > > by the Eclipse-Project rules or not but to me looks like it is. > > > > Looking at the +/- for this layout we have: > > / Medium Administrative-Overhead for Widget-Creator > > / Medium Administrative-Overhead for Eclipse-Foundation > > + Low burden to bring in new widget ideas and follow parallel ip > > + Release flexibility for the widget owner > > + Concerted release of widgets through the Nebula-Release-Train > > involving adversiment, ... . > > > > And there's one more nice side-effect. Up-grading from Incubator gives > > the community a chance to review the project, source code, ... and give > > feedback through the default channels because up-grading involves a > > project proposal (To make this as painless as possible we should provide > > a template proposal widget-owners can use and simply drop in their > > widget-description, ...). > > > > So now it's once more your turn Nebula-Developers and widget owners > > (soon you can add the title project lead to your mail signature :-). > > > > What do you think? I leave this topic once more open for the next weeks > > and hope that we come to a decision until then. > > > > Thanks for reading through this once more long mail and your feedback. > > > > Tom > > _______________________________________________ > > nebula-dev mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/nebula-dev > >
_______________________________________________ nebula-dev mailing list [email protected] https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/nebula-dev
