Sooo.. any consensus here on how to move forward? Wim, Nicolas - are you ok
with moving forward as a subproject or do you still have strong objections?

Edwin


On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 2:25 AM, Tom Schindl <[email protected]>wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I don't see the problem with creating a subproject(s). The main reason
> is that NatTable can follow its normal release schedule and I could
> envision others doing the same if they want too.
>
> For me the Nebula-Project is getting a Container-Project for widgets
> where people who don't want to deal with all the Eclipse Project stuff
> bring their widgets to Nebula-Proper and Nebula-Incubation and others
> create their own sub-project like Edwin feels more comfortable.
>
> At least 3 times a year (similar to the Eclipse Release Train) all
> Nebula-Projects are doing a release whereas subprojects can do releases
> in between.
>
> A release a very special thing within the Eclipse Project (e.g. we need
> a IP-Log, provide a project plan, ...) so I disagree we can simply see a
> release as a snapshot because if we want to get preceived serious we'd
> need to have a maint-branch and one where we develop new features.
>
> Tom
>
> Am 23.11.11 02:17, schrieb Edwin Park:
> > Hmm, interesting. Wim, Nicolas - I agree with what you are saying, but I
> > also see it as something of a departure from how Nebula has been
> > organized to date.
> >
> > In order to do what you say, I think there will need to be stronger
> > boundaries between widgets in terms of source, branches, builds,
> > artifacts, documentation, etc. The overhead of delineating widgets
> > within the Nebula project then begins to approach the overhead of having
> > a separate subproject to begin with...
> >
> > I'm not saying that it can't be done, but my feeling is that it will be
> > much more difficult to reorganize all of Nebula than to just have
> > NatTable as a separate subproject. And I'd love for it not to take
> > another year for us to bring NatTable to Eclipse.  ^_^;;
> >
> > Edwin
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 5:05 PM, Wim Jongman <[email protected]
> > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> >
> >     Hi,
> >
> >     Yes I agree with Nicolas. If the only way of getting you guys here
> >     is through a subproject then I will vote +1 but I think that  we are
> >     stronger if we join forces. We will still be responsible for our own
> >     widgets but we can work together on the commons (build, website,
> >     wiki, blogs, etc..)
> >
> >     Shall I continue to file the CQ while we discuss this?
> >
> >     Regards,
> >
> >     Wim
> >
> >     On 22 nov. 2011, at 12:36, Nicolas Richeton
> >     <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
> wrote:
> >
> >>     Hi all,
> >>
> >>     I'm not sure that creating subprojects for a single widget would
> >>     be a good thing. I understand the reasons why NatTable needs to be
> >>     a subproject, but I think these are issues we have to solve for
> >>     every widget :
> >>
> >>     * Being able to install independently :
> >>     Each widget has his own plugins : widget, tests, feature, ...
> >>      This won't change.
> >>     Version numbers do not necessary have to be in sync for all Nebula
> >>     widgets.
> >>
> >>     * Having its own build
> >>     XViewer already have his own build because eclipse projects
> >>     depends on it. This is something that can be done without being a
> >>     subproject, but I still think this should be avoided. (If we look
> >>     at an another projet : I believe SWT build fails if tests for one
> >>     component fail). The key thing is : projects which depends on
> >>     Nebula should not build against the trunk. They should build
> >>     against an integration or a release branch/site which always
> >>     builds. We have setup things in a way that make this work.
> >>
> >>     * Being able to release with its own schedule.
> >>     We are looking for a 1.0 nebula release with several widgets, but
> >>     we will always have to fix major/critial issues on a widget
> >>     without waiting for the next major Nebula release. I believe we
> >>     have to see a nebula release as a snapshot of the current stable
> >>     widgets (for the annual eclipse release train) and keep an update
> >>     site with intermediate/frequent releases.
> >>
> >>     It NatTable committers are ready to go fast and get out of
> >>     incubation right away, I rather remove all widgets from the
> >>     release project, keeping only NatTable and then add every stable
> >>     widget one after one, than going thru the eclipse process for only
> >>     one subproject.
> >>
> >>     That said, everything is possible :-)
> >>     --
> >>     Nicolas
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>     Le 21 nov. 2011 à 23:26, Tom Schindl a écrit :
> >>
> >>>     Hi,
> >>>
> >>>     +1 for me on moving forward as a subproject to Nebula but Wim I'd
> >>>     like
> >>>     to hear Wims and Nicolas' input.
> >>>
> >>>     Tom
> >>>
> >>>     Am 21.11.11 23:05, schrieb Edwin Park:
> >>>>     Hi all,
> >>>>
> >>>>     Once upon a time, there was a proposal to bring NatTable to
> >>>>     Eclipse... :-)
> >>>>
> >>>>     It has taken some time, but we've gotten through all the IP
> >>>>     attribution issues finally and I have the go ahead from Eclipse
> >>>>     legal
> >>>>     to push this forward again. In the meantime I know Nebula has been
> >>>>     going through changes as well. Importantly, in order to move
> forward
> >>>>     this needs to be pushed by the Nebula folks. Tom, would you still
> be
> >>>>     the one to do this or does that fall to Wim now?
> >>>>
> >>>>     Also, I wanted to update everyone on the current status and sync
> >>>>     up on
> >>>>     the plan for moving forward to make sure we're all on the same
> page:
> >>>>
> >>>>     The original New Widget request for NatTable is here:
> >>>>     https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=328836
> >>>>     The latest version of the code attached to this is NatTable
> >>>>     2.2.0. The
> >>>>     current production version is 2.3.0. No additional dependencies
> have
> >>>>     been added in the interim, but there is new post-2.3.0 code in
> trunk
> >>>>     that introduces a new dependency on Apache Poi for table export.
> >>>>     This
> >>>>     is packaged as a separate extension bundle however, so if there
> are
> >>>>     issues with this we can always omit it from moving over to
> Eclipse.
> >>>>
> >>>>     The NatTable Eclipse Project Proposal is here:
> >>>>
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Krpj0ceaWqP-WndbR1Ba79gwhGCbUHNspw-j9naYPQc/edit?hl=en_US
> >>>>     The only update that may need to be made for this is the tentative
> >>>>     project schedule, which currently indicates code contribution and
> >>>>     migration to Eclipse is Q4 2011..
> >>>>
> >>>>     The plan for moving NatTable to Nebula was to make it a Nebula
> >>>>     subproject rather than incorporating it into the conglomerate
> Nebula
> >>>>     project and build. Tom and I favored this approach because we
> wanted
> >>>>     to preserve the ability for NatTable to maintain its own
> independent
> >>>>     release schedule. NatTable has 7 active committers and a history
> of
> >>>>     putting out regular releases over the past four years. I'm happy
> to
> >>>>     take on the additional maintenance overhead of treating NatTable
> >>>>     as a
> >>>>     separate project since that's what it is now anyway.
> >>>>
> >>>>     Wayne needs confirmation from the Nebula project that we want to
> >>>>     move
> >>>>     forward with NatTable as a Nebula subproject, and then my
> >>>>     understanding from legal is that we'd need someone from Nebula
> >>>>     to kick
> >>>>     off the CQ.
> >>>>
> >>>>     It's been over a year since we started this journey and I'm eager
> to
> >>>>     see this through. :-)
> >>>>
> >>>>     Thanks,
> >>>>     Edwin
> >>>>     _______________________________________________
> >>>>     nebula-dev mailing list
> >>>>     [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
> >>>>     https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/nebula-dev
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>     --
> >>>     B e s t S o l u t i o n . a t                        EDV
> >>>     Systemhaus GmbH
> >>>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>     tom schindl                 geschäftsführer/CEO
> >>>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>     eduard-bodem-gasse 5-7/1   A-6020 innsbruck     fax      ++43 512
> >>>     935833 <tel:%2B%2B43%20512%20935833>
> >>>     http://www.BestSolution.at                      phone    ++43 512
> >>>     935834 <tel:%2B%2B43%20512%20935834>
> >>>     _______________________________________________
> >>>     nebula-dev mailing list
> >>>     [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
> >>>     https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/nebula-dev
> >>
> >>     _______________________________________________
> >>     nebula-dev mailing list
> >>     [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
> >>     https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/nebula-dev
> >
> >     _______________________________________________
> >     nebula-dev mailing list
> >     [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
> >     https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/nebula-dev
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > nebula-dev mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/nebula-dev
>
>
> --
> B e s t S o l u t i o n . a t                        EDV Systemhaus GmbH
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> tom schindl                 geschäftsführer/CEO
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> eduard-bodem-gasse 5-7/1   A-6020 innsbruck     fax      ++43 512 935833
> http://www.BestSolution.at                      phone    ++43 512 935834
> _______________________________________________
> 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

Reply via email to