Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] TM withdrawal from Mars
On 25 Nov 2014, at 20:54, Greg Watson wrote: RSE is no longer being actively maintained. I don’t think it is acceptable (or allowed) to include unmaintained components in Mars, I think that is not true. There are multiple projects and components inside Eclipse which are just bundled and not explicitly maintained unless something very critical is found (I might be wrong, but that is at least my perception) so at a minimum, someone would need to agree to maintain it. What I was thinking the minimum would be someone agrees to keep an eye on the build and that it continues to work. This means fixing bugs, fixing build issues, updating documentation, provided project/ramp down plans for the releases, testing the M and RC versions, and contributing to the release review documentation. Participation in Mars also includes the SR1 and SR2 releases, so there would also be some work required for these also. What kind of work have there been on RSE in the past 2 years ? I'm asking out of ignorance here because looking at http://dashboard.eclipse.org/project.html?project=tools.tm I would reckon all the work in here was related to the terminal work for the last many years ? If one or more people are willing to step up and agree to provide this support, then we could consider inclusion in Mars. Even this is problematic though, since RSE is very large, so would they be supporting all of RSE or only a part? If only a part, then we would need to determine which parts are unsupported and remove them. I'm again possibly ignorant here but if the intent is simply to retire it I would say include all *as-is*, document clearly on the project web page it is only in maintenance mode and list what the alternatives are. If it is possible that other active projects (such as TCF and org.eclipse.remote) could be used in place of RSE, maybe it would be better to direct effort towards these? Yes, if RSE is dying we should look elsewhere for sure - but its not soon M4 time and if RSE is out of Mars we suddenly need to develop a full replacement for its remote access and filesystem support AND adjust it in all our plugins that rely on it we are not going to make it for Mars. Hence why I suggest to simply keep RSE alive and yes, look at how we can get replacement for at least the remote access which I believe to be a core feature of any IDE in todays age. Maybe we could setup a conf call to call of arms and discuss this since email might be ineffective since there are so many unknowns (at least for me) yet. /max Greg On Nov 21, 2014, at 2:41 PM, Max Rydahl Andersen mande...@redhat.com wrote: That sounds really bad :/ This means if I grok it right that eclipse will loose its ability to mount and browse Ftp and scp files systems, correct ? If that goes eclipse becomes really weak in the already remote heavy access world with cloud and containers. For one our server adapters utilizes this to support remote deployment to file based servers. What would it take for keeping rse or at least parts of it alive for mars and future releases ? /max http://about.me/maxandersen On 21 Nov 2014, at 17:25, Greg Watson g.wat...@computer.org wrote: The Target Management (TM) project is comprised of two main projects: Remote System Explorer (RSE) and Terminal. Only the Terminal project is under active development, and there are plans currently to merge this with the TCF Terminal project. We are planning to have one final release of TM (3.7) to coincide with Luna SR2, and then only provide service releases on an as-needed basis. As a consequence, we don’t have the resources to contribute to a Mars release, so are notifying everyone of our intention to withdraw from Mars. Please let us know if there are any comments or concerns regarding this. Regards, Greg ___ cross-project-issues-dev mailing list cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev ___ cross-project-issues-dev mailing list cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev ___ cross-project-issues-dev mailing list cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev /max http://about.me/maxandersen ___ cross-project-issues-dev mailing list cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] TM withdrawal from Mars
On 26 Nov 2014, at 7:10, Mickael Istria wrote: On 11/25/2014 08:54 PM, Greg Watson wrote: we would need to determine which parts are unsupported and remove them. I don't understand why you want to remove things that are not actively supported any more? It the project choice and freedom to do so if they cannot sustain the maintenance anymore. Thus I can definitely understand why, but I do not agree it it s the right thing to do. The fact that no-one currently plans to making changes in those parts doesn't make that they need to be removed. RSE is a mature project, and in its current state, it provides satisfaction to some users, and I believe it could easily keep on providing value without changing a single line of code nor doing any rebuild. The project is still useful independently of whether it has active contributors or not. +100. If it is possible that other active projects (such as TCF and org.eclipse.remote) could be used in place of RSE, maybe it would be better to direct effort towards these? +1 for focusing on a single project to do one thing, but if RSE is currently the most advanced on this topic (at least it has FTP/SFTP support), I don't see the benefit on re-implementing the same thing in other project, instead of just using what's already there. *someone* need to implement an maintain it. RSE has always been a complex beast, so if another project has an alternative and simpler approach I think that is worth exploring - but for Mars I think we should keep RSE around and work on a migration plan to something else. /max http://about.me/maxandersen ___ cross-project-issues-dev mailing list cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev
Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] TM withdrawal from Mars
On Nov 26, 2014, at 1:10 AM, Mickael Istria mist...@redhat.com wrote: On 11/25/2014 08:54 PM, Greg Watson wrote: we would need to determine which parts are unsupported and remove them. I don't understand why you want to remove things that are not actively supported any more? The fact that no-one currently plans to making changes in those parts doesn't make that they need to be removed. RSE is a mature project, and in its current state, it provides satisfaction to some users, and I believe it could easily keep on providing value without changing a single line of code nor doing any rebuild. The project is still useful independently of whether it has active contributors or not. This may be the case if you are considering a project in isolation, however we are deciding if TM should part of a simultaneous release. Being part of the simultaneous release means that projects must work together in any combination of any install. This requires a degree of testing at least, as well as fixing bugs if any problems are encountered. If no-one has agreed to undertake this level of support, then I don’t see how the project can meet the mandatory requirements for a simultaneous release. Greg ___ cross-project-issues-dev mailing list cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev
Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] TM withdrawal from Mars
On 26 Nov 2014, at 16:17, Greg Watson wrote: On Nov 26, 2014, at 1:10 AM, Mickael Istria mist...@redhat.com wrote: On 11/25/2014 08:54 PM, Greg Watson wrote: we would need to determine which parts are unsupported and remove them. I don't understand why you want to remove things that are not actively supported any more? The fact that no-one currently plans to making changes in those parts doesn't make that they need to be removed. RSE is a mature project, and in its current state, it provides satisfaction to some users, and I believe it could easily keep on providing value without changing a single line of code nor doing any rebuild. The project is still useful independently of whether it has active contributors or not. This may be the case if you are considering a project in isolation, however we are deciding if TM should part of a simultaneous release. Being part of the simultaneous release means that projects must work together in any combination of any install. This requires a degree of testing at least, as well as fixing bugs if any problems are encountered. If no-one has agreed to undertake this level of support, then I don’t see how the project can meet the mandatory requirements for a simultaneous release. Which is why I've asked *what* kind of bugfixes etc. RSE have received and is expected to need so we can find someone to take this over. I and others already said we would like to help - but noone have responded yet (I assume Thanksgiving is stealing most US based people's attention ;) /max Greg ___ cross-project-issues-dev mailing list cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev /max http://about.me/maxandersen ___ cross-project-issues-dev mailing list cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev
Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] TM withdrawal from Mars
The org.eclipse.remote API currently supports SSH/SFTP using JSch. There is no support for FTP or TELNET, however it is possible that these could be added. It is primarily designed to provide a programmatic interface to remote processes and remote filesystem access (including an EFS service), so it doesn’t provide a UI in the same way that RSE does. However this is discussion going on the tm-dev list about using the TCF Target Explorer to provide this functionality. Regards, Greg On Nov 21, 2014, at 5:19 PM, Max Rydahl Andersen mande...@redhat.com wrote: Looks interesting. Will need to look closer ;) Looking mainly for answers to: Is this part of Mars ? Does it support ftp ? Does it support using them as linked folders/remote file systems ? /max http://about.me/maxandersen On 21 Nov 2014, at 22:15, Denis Roy denis@eclipse.org wrote: On 11/21/2014 04:04 PM, Max Rydahl Andersen wrote: Got info on this org.eclipse.parralls option? http://git.eclipse.org/c/ptp/org.eclipse.remote.git/ ? Btw. I used as little as possible from tm. But the remote explorer and file system support I haven't found anywhere else in eclipse ecosystem so If we got something in the release train that is better I'm interested. /max http://about.me/maxandersen On 21 Nov 2014, at 21:46, Wayne Beaton wa...@eclipse.org wrote: You had me at hello. Wayne On 21/11/14 03:30 PM, Doug Schaefern wrote: The fact of the matter is that RSE is an architectural nightmare. It has a history as a remote environment for IBM mainframes which was super overkill for what we use it for in the Linux and embedded space. Good riddance IMHO. To that end, I am currently working on removing our dependency on RSE in CDT and will be using the org.eclipse.remote plug-ins started by the Parallel Tools folks. It’s a much simpler architecture and super easy to extend. It already has support for ssh connections. Doug. From: Wayne Beaton wa...@eclipse.org Organization: The Eclipse Foundation Reply-To: Cross project issues cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org Date: Friday, November 21, 2014 at 2:51 PM To: cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org Subject: Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] TM withdrawal from Mars I had a similar thought. I actually use RSE. In fact, I just did a bunch of work to include an adapter for my image viewer plug-in to preview images via RSE (I'll share this shortly). There's no requirement for a project to make new releases for the simultaneous release. There's nothing stopping a project from just contributing a service release. I should think that most of the heavy lifting is done. It's perfectly reasonable for a project to remain in maintenance mode. What additional resources to you believe that you require? I believe that all you need to do is declare your participation and make sure that the aggregation file is correct. Perhaps others can help with this. Wayne On 21/11/14 02:41 PM, Max Rydahl Andersen wrote: That sounds really bad :/ This means if I grok it right that eclipse will loose its ability to mount and browse Ftp and scp files systems, correct ? If that goes eclipse becomes really weak in the already remote heavy access world with cloud and containers. For one our server adapters utilizes this to support remote deployment to file based servers. What would it take for keeping rse or at least parts of it alive for mars and future releases ? /max http://about.me/maxandersen On 21 Nov 2014, at 17:25, Greg Watson g.wat...@computer.org wrote: The Target Management (TM) project is comprised of two main projects: Remote System Explorer (RSE) and Terminal. Only the Terminal project is under active development, and there are plans currently to merge this with the TCF Terminal project. We are planning to have one final release of TM (3.7) to coincide with Luna SR2, and then only provide service releases on an as-needed basis. As a consequence, we don’t have the resources to contribute to a Mars release, so are notifying everyone of our intention to withdraw from Mars. Please let us know if there are any comments or concerns regarding this. Regards, Greg ___ cross-project-issues-dev mailing list cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev ___ cross-project-issues-dev mailing list cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev -- Wayne Beaton @waynebeaton The Eclipse Foundation 728X90.jpg
Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] TM withdrawal from Mars
Thanks Greg for keeping us well informed. I'll be sorry to see it go ... though I use it less now than I used to. I have opened a bug to track it's removal from simrel aggregation: Bug 452899 - Remove TM contribution from Mars And, just trying it locally seems that PTP has a hard dependency on one of its features. I won't commit my removal quite yet, but I hope teams such as PTP and anyone else who has a direct dependency on it can provide an M4 warm-up build soon, that has the dependency removed. This is a good idea, since often when one spot is fixed, it simply reveals another spot that needs fixing, and sometimes takes several iterations to find them all. AND M4 is not that far off! M4 +0 is 12/12 and, remember, that M4 is when we switch to just having a one-week delivery window, so everyone's contributions are due by 12/17, with EPP and availability due on 12/19. Typically warm-up builds are pretty important once the cycle gets compressed like that. = = = = I do not want to prolong the inevitable, or keep bad code around, just for the sake of convenience, but will remind everyone on the release train, that you can use code from other projects, not on the train, a) as long as it is a released version and b) still meets all the criteria for inclusion. This is always a bit risky, since, in a way, you then become responsible for it ... not literally, from Eclipse Foundations point of view, but from the point of view of your users, you are. = = = = Thanks again, to you all, From: Greg Watson g.wat...@computer.org To: Cross project issues cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org, Date: 11/21/2014 11:25 AM Subject:[cross-project-issues-dev] TM withdrawal from Mars Sent by:cross-project-issues-dev-boun...@eclipse.org The Target Management (TM) project is comprised of two main projects: Remote System Explorer (RSE) and Terminal. Only the Terminal project is under active development, and there are plans currently to merge this with the TCF Terminal project. We are planning to have one final release of TM (3.7) to coincide with Luna SR2, and then only provide service releases on an as-needed basis. As a consequence, we don’t have the resources to contribute to a Mars release, so are notifying everyone of our intention to withdraw from Mars. Please let us know if there are any comments or concerns regarding this. Regards, Greg ___ cross-project-issues-dev mailing list cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev ___ cross-project-issues-dev mailing list cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev
[cross-project-issues-dev] TM withdrawal from Mars
The Target Management (TM) project is comprised of two main projects: Remote System Explorer (RSE) and Terminal. Only the Terminal project is under active development, and there are plans currently to merge this with the TCF Terminal project. We are planning to have one final release of TM (3.7) to coincide with Luna SR2, and then only provide service releases on an as-needed basis. As a consequence, we don’t have the resources to contribute to a Mars release, so are notifying everyone of our intention to withdraw from Mars. Please let us know if there are any comments or concerns regarding this. Regards, Greg ___ cross-project-issues-dev mailing list cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev
Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] TM withdrawal from Mars
That sounds really bad :/ This means if I grok it right that eclipse will loose its ability to mount and browse Ftp and scp files systems, correct ? If that goes eclipse becomes really weak in the already remote heavy access world with cloud and containers. For one our server adapters utilizes this to support remote deployment to file based servers. What would it take for keeping rse or at least parts of it alive for mars and future releases ? /max http://about.me/maxandersen On 21 Nov 2014, at 17:25, Greg Watson g.wat...@computer.org wrote: The Target Management (TM) project is comprised of two main projects: Remote System Explorer (RSE) and Terminal. Only the Terminal project is under active development, and there are plans currently to merge this with the TCF Terminal project. We are planning to have one final release of TM (3.7) to coincide with Luna SR2, and then only provide service releases on an as-needed basis. As a consequence, we don’t have the resources to contribute to a Mars release, so are notifying everyone of our intention to withdraw from Mars. Please let us know if there are any comments or concerns regarding this. Regards, Greg ___ cross-project-issues-dev mailing list cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev ___ cross-project-issues-dev mailing list cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev
Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] TM withdrawal from Mars
The fact of the matter is that RSE is an architectural nightmare. It has a history as a remote environment for IBM mainframes which was super overkill for what we use it for in the Linux and embedded space. Good riddance IMHO. To that end, I am currently working on removing our dependency on RSE in CDT and will be using the org.eclipse.remote plug-ins started by the Parallel Tools folks. It’s a much simpler architecture and super easy to extend. It already has support for ssh connections. Doug. From: Wayne Beaton wa...@eclipse.orgmailto:wa...@eclipse.org Organization: The Eclipse Foundation Reply-To: Cross project issues cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.orgmailto:cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org Date: Friday, November 21, 2014 at 2:51 PM To: cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.orgmailto:cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.orgmailto:cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org Subject: Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] TM withdrawal from Mars I had a similar thought. I actually use RSE. In fact, I just did a bunch of work to include an adapter for my image viewer plug-in to preview images via RSE (I'll share this shortly). There's no requirement for a project to make new releases for the simultaneous release. There's nothing stopping a project from just contributing a service release. I should think that most of the heavy lifting is done. It's perfectly reasonable for a project to remain in maintenance mode. What additional resources to you believe that you require? I believe that all you need to do is declare your participation and make sure that the aggregation file is correct. Perhaps others can help with this. Wayne On 21/11/14 02:41 PM, Max Rydahl Andersen wrote: That sounds really bad :/ This means if I grok it right that eclipse will loose its ability to mount and browse Ftp and scp files systems, correct ? If that goes eclipse becomes really weak in the already remote heavy access world with cloud and containers. For one our server adapters utilizes this to support remote deployment to file based servers. What would it take for keeping rse or at least parts of it alive for mars and future releases ? /max http://about.me/maxandersen On 21 Nov 2014, at 17:25, Greg Watson g.wat...@computer.orgmailto:g.wat...@computer.org wrote: The Target Management (TM) project is comprised of two main projects: Remote System Explorer (RSE) and Terminal. Only the Terminal project is under active development, and there are plans currently to merge this with the TCF Terminal project. We are planning to have one final release of TM (3.7) to coincide with Luna SR2, and then only provide service releases on an as-needed basis. As a consequence, we don’t have the resources to contribute to a Mars release, so are notifying everyone of our intention to withdraw from Mars. Please let us know if there are any comments or concerns regarding this. Regards, Greg ___ cross-project-issues-dev mailing list cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.orgmailto:cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev ___ cross-project-issues-dev mailing list cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.orgmailto:cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev -- Wayne Beaton @waynebeaton The Eclipse Foundation [EclipseCon2015]http://www.eclipsecon.org/na2015 ___ cross-project-issues-dev mailing list cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev
Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] TM withdrawal from Mars
You had me at hello. Wayne On 21/11/14 03:30 PM, Doug Schaefer wrote: The fact of the matter is that RSE is an architectural nightmare. It has a history as a remote environment for IBM mainframes which was super overkill for what we use it for in the Linux and embedded space. Good riddance IMHO. To that end, I am currently working on removing our dependency on RSE in CDT and will be using the org.eclipse.remote plug-ins started by the Parallel Tools folks. It’s a much simpler architecture and super easy to extend. It already has support for ssh connections. Doug. From: Wayne Beaton wa...@eclipse.org mailto:wa...@eclipse.org Organization: The Eclipse Foundation Reply-To: Cross project issues cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org mailto:cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org Date: Friday, November 21, 2014 at 2:51 PM To: cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org mailto:cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org mailto:cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org Subject: Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] TM withdrawal from Mars I had a similar thought. I actually use RSE. In fact, I just did a bunch of work to include an adapter for my image viewer plug-in to preview images via RSE (I'll share this shortly). There's no requirement for a project to make new releases for the simultaneous release. There's nothing stopping a project from just contributing a service release. I should think that most of the heavy lifting is done. It's perfectly reasonable for a project to remain in maintenance mode. What additional resources to you believe that you require? I believe that all you need to do is declare your participation and make sure that the aggregation file is correct. Perhaps others can help with this. Wayne On 21/11/14 02:41 PM, Max Rydahl Andersen wrote: That sounds really bad :/ This means if I grok it right that eclipse will loose its ability to mount and browse Ftp and scp files systems, correct ? If that goes eclipse becomes really weak in the already remote heavy access world with cloud and containers. For one our server adapters utilizes this to support remote deployment to file based servers. What would it take for keeping rse or at least parts of it alive for mars and future releases ? /max http://about.me/maxandersen On 21 Nov 2014, at 17:25, Greg Watsong.wat...@computer.org wrote: The Target Management (TM) project is comprised of two main projects: Remote System Explorer (RSE) and Terminal. Only the Terminal project is under active development, and there are plans currently to merge this with the TCF Terminal project. We are planning to have one final release of TM (3.7) to coincide with Luna SR2, and then only provide service releases on an as-needed basis. As a consequence, we don’t have the resources to contribute to a Mars release, so are notifying everyone of our intention to withdraw from Mars. Please let us know if there are any comments or concerns regarding this. Regards, Greg ___ cross-project-issues-dev mailing list cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev ___ cross-project-issues-dev mailing list cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev -- Wayne Beaton @waynebeaton The Eclipse Foundation EclipseCon 2015 http://www.eclipsecon.org/na2015 ___ cross-project-issues-dev mailing list cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev -- Wayne Beaton @waynebeaton The Eclipse Foundation EclipseCon 2015 http://www.eclipsecon.org/na2015 ___ cross-project-issues-dev mailing list cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev
Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] TM withdrawal from Mars
On 11/21/2014 04:04 PM, Max Rydahl Andersen wrote: Got info on this org.eclipse.parralls option? http://git.eclipse.org/c/ptp/org.eclipse.remote.git/ ? Btw. I used as little as possible from tm. But the remote explorer and file system support I haven't found anywhere else in eclipse ecosystem so If we got something in the release train that is better I'm interested. /max http://about.me/maxandersen On 21 Nov 2014, at 21:46, Wayne Beaton wa...@eclipse.org mailto:wa...@eclipse.org wrote: You had me at hello. Wayne On 21/11/14 03:30 PM, Doug Schaefern wrote: The fact of the matter is that RSE is an architectural nightmare. It has a history as a remote environment for IBM mainframes which was super overkill for what we use it for in the Linux and embedded space. Good riddance IMHO. To that end, I am currently working on removing our dependency on RSE in CDT and will be using the org.eclipse.remote plug-ins started by the Parallel Tools folks. It’s a much simpler architecture and super easy to extend. It already has support for ssh connections. Doug. From: Wayne Beaton wa...@eclipse.org mailto:wa...@eclipse.org Organization: The Eclipse Foundation Reply-To: Cross project issues cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org mailto:cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org Date: Friday, November 21, 2014 at 2:51 PM To: cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org mailto:cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org mailto:cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org Subject: Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] TM withdrawal from Mars I had a similar thought. I actually use RSE. In fact, I just did a bunch of work to include an adapter for my image viewer plug-in to preview images via RSE (I'll share this shortly). There's no requirement for a project to make new releases for the simultaneous release. There's nothing stopping a project from just contributing a service release. I should think that most of the heavy lifting is done. It's perfectly reasonable for a project to remain in maintenance mode. What additional resources to you believe that you require? I believe that all you need to do is declare your participation and make sure that the aggregation file is correct. Perhaps others can help with this. Wayne On 21/11/14 02:41 PM, Max Rydahl Andersen wrote: That sounds really bad :/ This means if I grok it right that eclipse will loose its ability to mount and browse Ftp and scp files systems, correct ? If that goes eclipse becomes really weak in the already remote heavy access world with cloud and containers. For one our server adapters utilizes this to support remote deployment to file based servers. What would it take for keeping rse or at least parts of it alive for mars and future releases ? /max http://about.me/maxandersen On 21 Nov 2014, at 17:25, Greg Watsong.wat...@computer.org wrote: The Target Management (TM) project is comprised of two main projects: Remote System Explorer (RSE) and Terminal. Only the Terminal project is under active development, and there are plans currently to merge this with the TCF Terminal project. We are planning to have one final release of TM (3.7) to coincide with Luna SR2, and then only provide service releases on an as-needed basis. As a consequence, we don’t have the resources to contribute to a Mars release, so are notifying everyone of our intention to withdraw from Mars. Please let us know if there are any comments or concerns regarding this. Regards, Greg ___ cross-project-issues-dev mailing list cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev ___ cross-project-issues-dev mailing list cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev -- Wayne Beaton @waynebeaton The Eclipse Foundation EclipseCon 2015 http://www.eclipsecon.org/na2015 ___ cross-project-issues-dev mailing list cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev -- Wayne Beaton @waynebeaton The Eclipse Foundation 728X90.jpg http://www.eclipsecon.org/na2015 ___ cross-project-issues-dev mailing list cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org mailto:cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list
Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] TM withdrawal from Mars
Looks interesting. Will need to look closer ;) Looking mainly for answers to: Is this part of Mars ? Does it support ftp ? Does it support using them as linked folders/remote file systems ? /max http://about.me/maxandersen On 21 Nov 2014, at 22:15, Denis Roy denis@eclipse.org wrote: On 11/21/2014 04:04 PM, Max Rydahl Andersen wrote: Got info on this org.eclipse.parralls option? http://git.eclipse.org/c/ptp/org.eclipse.remote.git/ ? Btw. I used as little as possible from tm. But the remote explorer and file system support I haven't found anywhere else in eclipse ecosystem so If we got something in the release train that is better I'm interested. /max http://about.me/maxandersen On 21 Nov 2014, at 21:46, Wayne Beaton wa...@eclipse.org wrote: You had me at hello. Wayne On 21/11/14 03:30 PM, Doug Schaefern wrote: The fact of the matter is that RSE is an architectural nightmare. It has a history as a remote environment for IBM mainframes which was super overkill for what we use it for in the Linux and embedded space. Good riddance IMHO. To that end, I am currently working on removing our dependency on RSE in CDT and will be using the org.eclipse.remote plug-ins started by the Parallel Tools folks. It’s a much simpler architecture and super easy to extend. It already has support for ssh connections. Doug. From: Wayne Beaton wa...@eclipse.org Organization: The Eclipse Foundation Reply-To: Cross project issues cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org Date: Friday, November 21, 2014 at 2:51 PM To: cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org Subject: Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] TM withdrawal from Mars I had a similar thought. I actually use RSE. In fact, I just did a bunch of work to include an adapter for my image viewer plug-in to preview images via RSE (I'll share this shortly). There's no requirement for a project to make new releases for the simultaneous release. There's nothing stopping a project from just contributing a service release. I should think that most of the heavy lifting is done. It's perfectly reasonable for a project to remain in maintenance mode. What additional resources to you believe that you require? I believe that all you need to do is declare your participation and make sure that the aggregation file is correct. Perhaps others can help with this. Wayne On 21/11/14 02:41 PM, Max Rydahl Andersen wrote: That sounds really bad :/ This means if I grok it right that eclipse will loose its ability to mount and browse Ftp and scp files systems, correct ? If that goes eclipse becomes really weak in the already remote heavy access world with cloud and containers. For one our server adapters utilizes this to support remote deployment to file based servers. What would it take for keeping rse or at least parts of it alive for mars and future releases ? /max http://about.me/maxandersen On 21 Nov 2014, at 17:25, Greg Watson g.wat...@computer.org wrote: The Target Management (TM) project is comprised of two main projects: Remote System Explorer (RSE) and Terminal. Only the Terminal project is under active development, and there are plans currently to merge this with the TCF Terminal project. We are planning to have one final release of TM (3.7) to coincide with Luna SR2, and then only provide service releases on an as-needed basis. As a consequence, we don’t have the resources to contribute to a Mars release, so are notifying everyone of our intention to withdraw from Mars. Please let us know if there are any comments or concerns regarding this. Regards, Greg ___ cross-project-issues-dev mailing list cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev ___ cross-project-issues-dev mailing list cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev -- Wayne Beaton @waynebeaton The Eclipse Foundation ___ cross-project-issues-dev mailing list cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev -- Wayne Beaton @waynebeaton The Eclipse Foundation 728X90.jpg ___ cross-project-issues-dev mailing list cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit https://dev.eclipse.org
