Hi
Except that of course we should replace CVS by GIT in at least the
EPPs and so add on a lot more MB.
Regards
Ed Willink
On 26/06/2014 10:18, Fred Bricon wrote:
+1. Alex Blewitt blogged about it 3 years ago http
Hi
Just not in the Modeling EPP where I looked.
Regards
Ed Willink
On 26/06/2014 15:34, Mickael Istria
wrote:
On 06/26/2014 04:31 PM, Ed Willink
wrote:
Except that of course we
Hi
Sorry for the noise; looking for org.eclipse.git. org.eclipse.egit
is in Modeling EPP.
Regards
Ed Willink
On 26/06/2014 15:52, Ed Willink wrote:
Hi
Just not in the Modeling EPP where I looked
raw types
other than a very few fixed by very local @suppressWarnings for
rawTypes/uncheckedCast.
Since the API is evolving, it would seem to be a good point to also
introduce @NonNull/@Nullable.
Regards
Ed Willink
___
cross-project
Hi Sven
Will this make Xpand obsolete as a separate install/download? (I hope it
does.)
Regards
Ed Willink
On 19/08/2014 14:45, Sven Efftinge wrote:
Hi,
Xtext and MWE will be participating in the Mars simultaneous release, with
offset +2.
Current plan is to contribute the
7.0.0. There are however many legacy consumers and so
the old plugins are likely to continue to be available via a separate optional
install so long as a Simultaneous Release Participant needs them.
Regards
Ed Willink
___
cross
Hi,
QVTd will be participating in the Mars simultaneous release, with offset +3.
Current plan is to graduate to 1.0.0.
http://projects.eclipse.org/projects/modeling.mmt.qvtd/releases/1.0.0-mars
Regards
Ed Willink
___
cross
ld be nice to be able to filter further logs from that offender.
Regards
Ed Willink
On 02/09/2014 11:09, Lars Vogel wrote:
Hi,
Sometimes the Eclipse IDE freezes without providing feedback which
part of the code is responsible for the freeze. Such freezes should be
avoided, but
Ed Willink
___
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
sions.
Regards
Ed Willink
___
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/
uot;Basic".
Regards
Ed Willink
On 13/10/2014 05:17, Eike Stepper wrote:
Hi,
I have noticed that the former "Eclipse Standard" package has recently
been renamed to "Eclipse IDE for Eclipse Committers". Personally I
don't like the new name because it sug
specifically requests them.
Please comment on [1].
Regards
Ed Willink
[1] https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=449568
___
cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org
To change your delivery options
rhaps Eclipse GIT, and the category entries can be
unconstrained.
Worst of all are features that start "Source for ...".
Regards
Ed Willink
___
cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org
To change y
bstraction further on.
Is anyone else seeing this as a problem?
Regards
Ed Willink
___
cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from
this l
evel where
there might even be integration with changing project dependencies
during a slow open.
Regards
Ed Willink
On 02/12/2014 21:07, Lars Vogel wrote:
Hi Ed,
If an editor accesses the Internet I think it should use a worker
thread to get the editor content. I have not se
the rebuild test easy. We had to eliminate obsolete
practices such as mapping.ini in which the build time was incorporated
into source and so guaranteed a pseudo-change.
Regards
Ed Willink
On 08/01/2015 20:40, Chuck Bridgham wrote:
I'm posting this to cross-projects because w
.
Caused by: [0.2]java.net.SocketTimeoutException: connect timed out
Any news?
Regards
Ed Willink
On 31/01/2015 18:33, Doug Schaefer wrote:
No, I think they're all broken. One I was using can't see the git repos.
Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone on the Rogers netw
;three item' overview, perhaps the PMI could supervise a
list of overview N&N's.
Regards
Ed Willink
On 02/02/2015 10:14, Lars Vogel wrote:
Hi Marcel,
I think the correct solution would be to extend the purpose of the
Platform N&N to include newsitems from the EPP si
Hi
A mishmash is certainly undesirable, but they are indirected and maybe a
style consensus might materialize. (Maybe the PMI might even help format
it).
If the PMI doesn't help, we have to introduce a new all-projects
database/HTML file.
Regards
Ed Willink
On 02/02/20
orm approach of having the developer describe his
development is much more efficient.
I tend to agree with that.
Ideally! What a Utopia. Many projects struggle to raise development man
power let alone extra specialists, so a lightweight aide for the
developer(s) please.
Regards
Hi
No. Unfortunately only for PPEs.
If you roll your own Eclipse, you need to install it and I could not see
it in the SimRel repo when I last looked.
Regards
Ed Willink
On 08/02/2015 12:17, Lars Vogel wrote:
AFAIK the plug-in is active by default for everybody...
Best
Hi
Is the recent change in BREE for org.eclipse.jdt.core from Java 6 to
Java 7 intended?
Was it announced?
Regards
Ed Willink
___
cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org
To change your delivery
and announced.
Regards
Ed Willink
On 04/03/2015 14:42, Daniel Megert wrote:
Hi Ed
Yes, this was intended. We never announce BREE changes.
Dani
From: Ed Willink
To: Cross project issues
Date: 04.03.2015 15:27
Subject: [cross-project-issues-dev] jdt.core move to Java 7 BREE
nt.
The policy of making everything equally available seems also suspect. Is
it really helpful to go through the composite repos to discover 20
releases of some component? Shouldn't P2 or its index scanning look only
at the top level/most recent aggregates leaving plumbing the depths til
consensus is.
Regards
Ed Willink
On 04/03/2015 16:32, Konstantin Komissarchik wrote:
What is the rationale for wanting to keep BREE levels as low as
possible? Even Java 7 enters the “no further public updates” phase in
April of this year. JRE 7 users in the normal update pipeline were
Hi
On 04/03/2015 16:31, Ed Willink wrote:
Thus OCL contributes 10 404s. EMF, Xtext, ... contribute too many to
count.
Each 404 seems to add one second to the getting contents time.
Many of the 404s are old repos with missing p2.index. The difference
between a miss and a hit makes little time
ore breaks
Java 6 support. i.e. it guarantees non-functionality on Java 6.
Regards
Ed Willink
On 04/03/2015 16:59, Doug Schaefer wrote:
Our consensus has always been to not have a consensus. Each project
moved to where they needed to be when they needed to be. Obviously the
decision
. (The
only 1.7 is the filesystem.java7 bundle.)
Therefore IMHO this change should have been announced:
a) because it was a change to the platform project plan
b) because it clearly has an impact on many other projects
Regards
Ed Willink
On 05/03/2015 01:02, Ian Bull wrote:
Is this
before M6 to avoid problems for headless users.
Regards
Ed Willink
[1] https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=450783
[2] https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=461634
[3] https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=462431
think we should all aim to move in I-builds
immediately following M6.
There may be a maintenance issue. e.g. Xtext 2.8.0 is out,so moving to
Guava 18 might force a 2.9.0.
I feel that barely a day before M6 is too late to request this.
Regards
Ed Willink
On 20/03/2015 21:34
went to 3.9.1, but Mars gets fixed elsewhere so
there really is no change and 3.9.0 might seem ok. Clearly it isn't. It
should be 3.9.100 until a real change comes along to make it 3.10.0.
Regards
Ed Willink
___
cross-project-issue
e Recommenders/Mylyn interacted with 11,12,15
Luna RC4 fudge: only one version of Guava to make an unpredictable
choice from.
Mars nightmare: someone introduces a second Guava version.
Regards
Ed Willink
On 25/03/2015 09:30, Andreas Sewe wrote:
Hi Ed, hi Wayne,
See https://b
a compile
time version failure because A and B have no overlap; an integrator's
bug. Rarely it may occur at run-time if no Guava version from the
overlap is available, a user's bug. Both are sensible, diagnosable and
fixable leaving Eclipse as a good flexible integration platform.
Re
ed.
An integration by C of both A and B could get a MANIFEST.MF warning
diagnostic that no mutually compatible version of Guava is available.
A launch of C should get a run-time failure because Guava 17 is not
suitable, and a diagnostic recommending installation of Guava 15 to
solve the prob
acked.
Regards
Ed Willink
On 25/03/2015 17:36, David M Williams wrote:
Well, we finally got a green build a few hours ago so that I was able
to promote a new 'staging' repository. Those of you who are "done"
should verify it is as you expect.
And, still 5 hou
ng by
unpack200 xxx.pack.gz xxx.jar
jarsigner -verify xxx.jar
Bad files report a SHA1 digest failure.
Regards
Ed Willink
On 11/04/2015 08:58, Alexander Nyßen wrote:
David,
I admit I am not very acquainted with the internals of signing and
pack200. However, we are using Tycho for our b
Hi
See https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=464594
It looks as if some inconsistently hashed/signed bundles are working
their way through magic caches. Try a maximal clean.
Regards
Ed Willink
On 15/04/2015 08:58, Tom Schindl wrote:
Hi,
And now the build is completely
Hi
Given David's comment, I presume that Buckminster is an example of a
build system that does use the batch signing service. So even if
Buckminster was changed today, the batch signing service is needed for
another couple of years.
Regards
Ed Willink
On 17/04/2015
be delayed.
QVTd has so far contributed 0.12.0M1,M2,M3,M4 then 1.0.0M5,M6 to the
Mars SimRel.
In the absence of adverse comments, M7 will revert to 0.12.0 again.
Since QVTd is a 'leaf' project, I don't expect this negative version
change will affect anyone.
Re
Hi
If you think Guava 18 is a good idea for Neon, I suggest starting to
make a lot of noise at M1 so that most projects migrate for M2.
Regards
Ed Willink
On 25/05/2015 18:10, Sam Davis wrote:
Hi,
Looking in releases/mars/201505221000/plugins/ I see only Guava 15. If
I
Hi
The signer appears to have failed. Its log file claims that it cannot
access the jarprocessor.
Consequently I cannot get OCL's RC4 contrbution signed.
Regards
Ed Willink
___
cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
cross-project-i
Hi
https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=469672
Regards
Ed Willink
On 08/06/2015 22:53, Ed Willink wrote:
Hi
The signer appears to have failed. Its log file claims that it cannot
access the jarprocessor.
Consequently I cannot get OCL's RC4 contrbution s
Hi
OCL RC4 built and signed. Contribution imminent.
Thanks Mikael.
Regards
Ed Willink
On 09/06/2015 06:32, Ed Willink wrote:
Hi
https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=469672
Regards
Ed Willink
On 08/06/2015 22:53, Ed Willink wrote:
Hi
The signer appears
Hi
It's awkward. We have a Wiki page, in which some of the obscure problems
we encountered are identified and where some relevant log files are.
http://wiki.eclipse.org/OCL/Dev/Releng/Issues_Documentation
Regards
Ed Willink
On 08/07/2015 09:09, Axel RICHARD wrote:
Hi,
I
one accidental answer and Eclipse becomes leaky.
Persisting only until the next Eclipse restart seems like a good idea.
Regards
Ed Willink
On 22/07/2015 22:39, Marcel Bruch wrote:
My proposal:…
Sounds okay to me. I wonder if the short cut „not to enable 3rd party class
names in
Hi
I agree. I think that the Eclipse-is-buggy hazard can be mitigated by
ensuring that any pop-up on behalf of a third party has a prominent logo
for that third party in the dialog. It may be a good idea for Eclipse
project logos to have similar prominence.
Regards
Ed Willink
Milestones and
Releases.
Regards
Ed Willink
On 13/08/2015 12:22, Tom Schindl wrote:
Hi,
Are there any rules regarding what version a project can contribute to SR1.
In SR0 e(fx)clipse contributed 2.0.0 and now we'd like to contribute
2.1.0 to SR1. Is this allowed?
Another thin
Hi
OCL will contribute 7.0.0 at offset +1 to Neon.
(The Classic Ecore OCL plugins will only have a minor version increment.)
Regards
Ed Willink
___
cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org
To change your
Hi
QVTd will contribute 1.0.0 to Neon at offset +3.
Regards
Ed Willink
___
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
%2Fporting%2Fremovals.html
so the discussed removal in
https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=475944
seems premature.
Regards
Ed Willink
On 12/09/2015 09:05, Ed Merks wrote:
Hi,
It was brought to my attention that
org.eclipse.jface.viewers.TableTreeViewer has been deleted. Yes
three years allowing API clean up. Other projects
will be more or less forced to synchronize which will be a nuisance, but
also a benefit, since they too can clean up their APIs.
Let Neon be versioned as 5.0.0 and we can all clean up.
Regards
Ed Willink
On 14/09/2015 08:31, Ed Merks
ature changes with the first plugin.
If different plugins change every milestone, you maximize difficulties
for consumers.
Much better to go for 5.x outright and we all take the hit just once.
Regards
Ed Willink
On 14/09/2015 16:02, Ian Bull wrote:
I may be wrong, but I don't
risk, and conversely the
non-fix has high reputational impact.
+1 for a respin.
Regards
Ed Willink
On 23/09/2015 11:08, Martin Lippert wrote:
Hey!
Strong +1 for a re-spin.
Cheers,
-Martin
Am 23.09.2015 um 12:04 schrieb Simon Scholz :
Hi,
the steps to reproduce the issue a
ill find rumor-based usage instructions such as:
Make sure you pick up EGIT from Mars.1
Make sure you do not pick Buildship
Nobody will know what they're doing and as committers we will have much
greater difficulty discovering user's configurations.
Regards
Ed Willi
.1 pulls in B.1, but C
uses B, users of C are in a mess until they get C.1.
Regards
Ed Willink
On 24/09/2015 05:26, Gunnar Wagenknecht wrote:
David,
Am 23.09.2015 um 23:37 schrieb David M Williams :
If not obvious, this means all participants in "coordinated release
have observed maintenance discipline suffer.
Regards
Ed Willink
On 24/09/2015 15:35, Ian Bull wrote:
Ed,
The reason for the change from Mars SR1 to Mars 1 is because this is
how we've been doing it for years. Many people (EGit / JGit, Mylyn,
CDT -- to name a few) had been pu
rather than the full RC* run-down.
Regards
Ed Willink
On 24/09/2015 19:09, Doug Schaefer wrote:
No, maintenance releases are still necessary. But you have to ask yourself, why
are we synchronizing them.
I think on another thread here we have the solution. Projects need to be
Hi
Ah! I thought it was just my magic fingers.
I consistently see this on
ssh://ewill...@git.eclipse.org/gitroot/www.eclipse.org/modeling/mdt.git
ssh://ewill...@git.eclipse.org/gitroot/www.eclipse.org/mmt.git
but other repos are ok.
Regards
Ed Willink
On 29/09/2015 15:25
HI
I'm seeing the problem on a Neon M1 with EGit 4.0.1 installation, jsch
0.1.51
Some GIT repos have stopped working on or after 27-Sep.
Others continue to work fine.
The problem must be at the Eclipse GIT server end.
Regards
Ed Willink
On 29/09/2015 18:08, Matthias
Hi
I didn't see any announcement, but there was little dissent in earlier
discussions.
In M2, org.eclipse.core.jobs has moved to Java 8 BREE so to all intents
and purposes Java 7 support is dead.
Regards
Ed Willink
On 07/03/2015 22:54, Lars Vogel wrote:
On Wed, Mar 4,
Hi Lars
As of a couple of minutes ago that plan [1] lists only the anomalous
jdt.annotation as a Java 8 minimum version.
Since that was the case six weeks ago too, I assumed that Java 8 BREE
would not actually occur for most plugins.
Regards
Ed Willink
[1]
https
Hi
I suspect that your upgrade, like mine, resulted in com.jcraft.jsch
0.1.51 and 0.1.53 'co-existing'. They don't. You might try forcibly
eliminating 0.1.51. Much safer to start with a clean new Eclipse
installation.
Regards
Ed Willink
On 04/10/2015 12:57,
Hi
I see no real problem. I was just highlighting that Java 8 time had
finally come, hopefully saving others time in debugging new failures.
Regards
Ed Willink
On 07/10/2015 16:34, Daniel Megert wrote:
Hi Ed
As mentioned in my announcement, the appendix with the BREEs will
, but you could normalize to
the number of reporting users.
Regards
Ed Willink
___
cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from
this
Hi
OCL will contribute 6.1.0 at offset +1 to Neon.
https://projects.eclipse.org/projects/modeling.mdt.ocl/releases/6.1.0-neon
Regards
Ed Willink
___
cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org
To change
Hi
QVTd will contribute 1.0.0 to Neon at offset +3.
https://projects.eclipse.org/projects/modeling.mmt.qvtd/releases/1.0.0-neon
Regards
Ed Willink
___
cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org
To change
have minimal maintenance teams. In some cases useful but
unmaintained tools, such as UML2 Tools, are killed by the major version
change.
Regards
Ed Willink
___
cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org
To c
them.)
Regards
Ed Willink
On 28/10/2015 15:24, Konstantin Komissarchik wrote:
> potentially no impact on most consumers of your API
And here lies the crux of our disagreement. I take an absolute
position on this issue. Potentially not breaking a consumer with an
exis
Hi
It worked for me just specifying path/*.jar in my Eclipse installation
folder. It showed the expected SWT_AWT anomally, and also 5 suspect
calls from com.google.guava 18.
Regards
Ed Willink
On 17/11/2015 17:13, Eike Stepper wrote:
Hi Wayne,
I downloaded that JDK and tried
Hi
See
https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=481766
2.11 was Mars. 2.12 is Neon, so the 2.11 milestone repo is obsolete.
Regards
Ed Willink
On 18/11/2015 09:03, Andrey Loskutov wrote:
Hi,
my platfrom UI gerrit builds [1, 2] fail due:
[INFO
Hi
Presumably you put tests in a separate plugin, so splitting off the
tests as a separate contribution gets you twice the limit with minimal
effort.
Perhaps a 1 line limit might be appropriate for non-deliverable code
such as tests and build tools.
Regards
Ed Willink
Hi
https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=484379
The OCL M4 contribution is only partially signed. I tried another build
and it is differently partially signed. Is anyone else seeing similar
problems? Has anyone got a solution?
Regards
Ed Willink
Hi
Two days later, the signer seems ok again.
OCL M4a contribution contributed.
Regards
Ed Willink
On 15/12/2015 11:03, Ed Willink wrote:
Hi
https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=484379
The OCL M4 contribution is only partially signed. I tried another
build and it is
build.
Regards
Ed Willink
On 08/01/2016 16:29, Marc Khouzam wrote:
I also would not like to have to change versions.
Changing the URL only allows me to change one line quickly.
Changing each version of each feature group is more work and more
error prone.
And when speaking about
Hudson is down.
IMHO given build-specific repos, the version range is redundant clutter
and arguably the source of much of this trouble.
Regards
Ed Willink
On 08/01/2016 21:44, Mickael Istria wrote:
On 01/08/2016 07:13 PM, Eike Stepper wrote:
Am 08.01.2016 um 17:29 schrieb Marc Khouzam:
I
Hi
Or just cache the checksum.
Regards
Ed Willink
On 11/01/2016 18:55, Sam Davis wrote:
Even if fully-qualified versions are used, is there anything to stop
someone from rebuilding bundles with changed content but reusing the
same version and qualifier? This is bad practice but
n of Orbit (R20151221205849).
But if a project has no maintenance to contribute, I thought no
rebuild/contribution was required and so of course an old Orbit would be
in use. (I don't think that QVTd imposes tight bounds on Orbit
contributions.)
Regards
HI
"commons.collections" doesn't seem that well used. No version of it is
my workspaces, so QVTd, (Xtext, EGIT, UML, QVTo, OCL) cannot have a
dependency on it. No re-contribution needed.
Regards
Ed Willink
On 04/02/2016 20:19, David M Williams wrote:
Ed,
Than
useful and
could help you enforce limited usage.
Regards
Ed Willink
On 04/02/2016 21:35, David M Williams wrote:
Off the top of my head, I think features are suppose to 'include'
them, since that is the only way to have a reproducible build or
install. If it was left u
bundles Orbit facilities
avoiding the need for users to learn how to include Orbit in the
available sites.
Regards
Ed Willink
On 05/02/2016 17:33, Konstantin Komissarchik wrote:
I would advise strongly against using the feature includes directive
for Orbit bundles. While doing so
propose to revert to 0.13.0RC1 tomorrow despite a 1.0.0M7
contribution a couple of weeks ago.
Is this a problem for anyone?
Regards
Ed Willink
___
cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org
To change your
not suggestion, for
SimRel participation.
Regards
Ed Willink
On 26/05/2016 01:12, David M Williams wrote:
> ... Does anyone know why, or how to fix it?
My EGit contacts have not responded to my mail. Or a classic case of
"committing, then going home" :) Or at least a cla
- EMF's consumers trust that EMF will be well-behaved API-wise and so
have a weaker than 4-part dependency
Just imagine a 4-part dependency on the platform, and perish the thought
that the platform might respin with an "a" contribution...
Regards
Ed Willink
On 2
pled to an RC1/RC2 Mylyn change.)
Regards
Ed Willink
On 26/05/2016 10:03, Mickael Istria wrote:
On 05/26/2016 10:53 AM, Ed Willink wrote:
We have perhaps 30 projects that depend on EMF.
If
- each project specifies a precise 4-part EMF version dependency
Project should simply not do t
Hi
What is to stop some HTML malware farming user-name/Eclipse-UUID pairs
for alternative purposes? The user may be anonymous to Eclipse but not
to others.
Regards
Ed Willink
On 03/06/2016 16:13, Ian Skerrett wrote:
All,
I wanted to make everyone aware that a UUID has been
default opted in?
Regards
Ed Willink
On 04/06/2016 06:50, Christian Campo wrote:
hi
is that a last minute idea that came up recently or why is it only
revealed now that is pretty much too late for any change ?
Gruß
Christian
Am 03.06.2016 um 17:13 schrieb Ian Skerrett
g with an opt-in for anything that even slightly impinges on
privacy. If this cannot be done at a platform-only RC5, then I feel that
it should wait till Neon.1.
I hope the EF will learn from this and treat committers and users with
more respect in future.
Regards
Ed Willink
On 0
an opt-out since the opt-out cannot easily be made
till after an opt-in has been in place for minutes if not days. (I
cannot edit a file to be uuid=0 until Eclipse startup has created the
file and no doubt done an initial communication with some server.)
Regards
have the UUID facility
removed pending a more acceptable realization?
Regards
Ed Willink
On 03/06/2016 16:13, Ian Skerrett wrote:
All,
I wanted to make everyone aware that a UUID has been added to the
Eclipse Platform [1] and is available in the current Neon RC. This
Thanks
Ed
On 05/06/2016 14:48, Ian Skerrett wrote:
Markus and everyone else,
I hear you and agree we need to remove the UUID in Neon. I will put a
statement to this effect on the bug you opened. It is obvious there is
a lot more discussion needed around this issue.
My apologies to Pas
pdate from
ZIP needed to resolve this preferring to report a plethora of
ambiguities from stale update sites contributed by projects. But for a
SimRel upgrade, all the replacements should be there, so surely replace
and evict should just work?
Regards
Ed Willink
On 16/06/201
+3:
https://projects.eclipse.org/projects/modeling.mmt.qvtd/releases/1.0.0-oxygen
Regards
Ed Willink
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
___
cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
cro
Hi
Comments inline.
Regards
Ed Willink
On 18/07/2016 16:42, Doug Schaefer wrote:
The +# days thing has never made sense, really. If you really chain
dependencies I’m sure you’d get into double digits. In fact, CDT
cycles on itself with a couple of other projects.
It'
announced participation,
surely it would be better to apply it just after M2 to all projects that
have made no SimRel commit since Neon?
Regards
Ed Willink
On 08/08/2016 16:34, Alexander Nyßen wrote:
Hi all,
I have just re-enabled the GEF repository for Oxygen and made
available the Ne
features with the required granularity, so the
multiple contributions should be just a matter of different feature
selections from a single build repo. However the extra modularity would
show in the P2 catalog. Perhaps that would be an improvement too.
Regards
Ed Willink
On 08/08
27;ll enable OCL so that things improve as soon as XText and friends appear.
Regards
Ed Willink
On 08/08/2016 18:27, David M Williams wrote:
> Can we have the Neon contributions available as in previous years?
Projects can do that, if they want -- as long as it is still "fit
the missing contributions
are highlighted.
AFAIAA all OCL's dependencies have declared intent so OCL can be enabled
and that is what I have done.
Regards
Ed Willink
On 09/08/2016 13:09, Kaloyan Raev wrote:
Hi folks,
I don't want to break the party, but your rece
Ed Willink
On 09/08/2016 13:27, Kaloyan Raev wrote:
Hi Ed,
Can't all these projects coordinate and make the necessary
contributions within a short time frame without leaving master broken
for a long time?
It's already M1 +2 date and the rest of the projects should be a
Xtext.
Regards
Ed Willink
On 09/08/2016 14:55, Kaloyan Raev wrote:
I really miss the root cause of the issue...
I don't understand how does it help breaking the SimRel build now and
hoping everything will be fine by the end of tomorrow.
As far as I understand, there
hould notify dependencies that we are waiting. Are
you joking? Why should I waste my time and EMF's time by suggesting that
it is about time for them to contribute. EMF is a -1/+1 contribution. Of
course it should know that it should contribute.
Regards
Ed Willink
On 09/08/
1 - 100 of 499 matches
Mail list logo
