Is there a reason that this isn't going into the wtp incubator project first until its ready? Keep in mind that if you are adding this to JSDT master and including it in the build, you are saying that this feature is part of WTP 3.7 release (regardless of how you structure features and repository categories) and you don't get to mark it with incubating disclaimers either since a mature project like JSDT cannot contain incubating pieces.
- Konstantin From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Victor V. Rubezhny Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 11:36 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [wtp-dev] The Bower IDE contribution On 03/23/2015 02:34 PM, Mickael Istria wrote: TL;DR: Being in master != being in delivery for Mars. On 03/23/2015 12:21 PM, Victor V. Rubezhny wrote: I didn't merged the code in master, since we still have few issues that blocks us from doing it in Mars (I don't think we can get them fixed in time for Mars, so it looks like we're missing Mars stream with this contribution). That's not a problem: we can have code in master without shipping it on Mars, that's what I strongly believe is the best approach for easier collaboration, and to avoid risk of diverging branches. IMHO, It's better to write your suggestions here (in mailing list) first, because I'm going to push another patch set into Gerrit ( https://git.eclipse.org/r/#/c/41693/ ), so if you have some code comments to do then your comments could be 'forgotten'. But still free to add comments to the change. Suggestion is that for a 1st integration in master, just include the bundles, not the pom files, do not update other pom files, feature.xml nor category.xml. So the code is there, people can work on it, but not altering the build and delivery. But this will not enable neither the building of Bower plug-ins, nor running its JUnit tests then. Then next iteration would be to see if we can build it easily, include in the category.xml file as a separete entry, without modifying the "regular" JSDT feature so it wouldn't get in Mars. That would allow people who want to try it to get it from a p2 repository. I can create a category for Bower IDE, but again: what will go into this category in case we aren't adding the Bower plug-ins into the build? It looks for me that we have to add the bower-related plug-ins to pom.xml-s, to create a separated feature for bower and then include that feature into site/pom.xml and category.xml, but not to jsdt.feature/jsdt_sdk.feature. But I'm not sure if bower plug-ins will not became 'installable by default' in such case. IMHO, contributing it into master will not make any harm (visually it will add few actions to context menus) for WTP and JSDT, all the 'issues' are only on how Bower IDE works. But it looks unfinished at the moment and still have few important issues to be fixed before that possible merge to master. M6 is going to be declared today or in few days, so it looks like it's too late to merge. I'm sure we can finish it for the Mars+1 stream. But I'd still like to hear/read on your suggestions. Being in master and being in Mars are totally separated topics, both technically and "organisationally". The most efficient and easier approach would be to have code in master right now, but not ship it in Mars. The fact that M6 is approaching doesn't forbid merging unrelated changes. It's actually something we could even add on the day before Mars if we wanted ;) -- Mickael Istria Eclipse developer at JBoss, by Red Hat <http://www.jboss.org/tools> My blog <http://mickaelistria.wordpress.com> - My Tweets <http://twitter.com/mickaelistria> _______________________________________________ wtp-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/wtp-dev
_______________________________________________ wtp-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/wtp-dev
