Bjorn: Let me respectfully disagree with your statements.
I have collaborated with the ATF team for several months now (to the point that I am now part of it ), and I would qualify it as open and transparent. This not the kind of "closed-shop" project you describe, as I can witness. It is being adopted by folks at JBoss, MyEclipse, Aptana and others. It made important contributions to getting a Mozilla browser widget generally available in the core 3.3 platform. It does some important collaboration with other projects such as Mozilla XULrunner and JavaXPCOM. It is a small team that delivers. Some project have more resource to dedicate than others to communication, and some projects are quieter or less outgoing, pretty much the same way some people can be quieter and less outgoing. We are probably not the best buzz generators are there for sure :-) Note that the statement you are referring to below is just about a project lead stating that he is taking some vacations and trying to push a release out of the door that very week. This is a small team, and getting our fearless leader out is something serious. Saying he is not available this week is both polite, open and transparent in my book. What is wrong with that? I think the harshness of your comments is both unwarranted and unjustified. And here are some elements of answers to your other remarks: >Your 2.1 downloads do not have the word "incubation" in them. Your project is no longer "incubation-conforming". I think the "0.21" drop predated the requirement to include the word incubation in the file name, or happened just about the requirement came into effect. The build scripts have been updated since. I am sure you noted that the weekly build now complies with that requirement. Would you want us to rename all the legacy drops file names? It would not make sense to me. Please elaborate. Are Eclipse process requirements retro active? >You are not using the standard Eclipse version numbering as 0.2.1 is not (in Eclipse naming) a milestone of 0.2. >It should be something more like 0.2.1M4. There has been ongoing work to update the version numbering scheme. I am not aware of requirements for milestone numbering beyond those for Europa projects. I am aware of a guideline for incubation to use milestones, a common practice to use milestones number in the released file names by several projects, but not a requirement. Do we should or do we must? >Are you all doing Eclipse-standard six week milestones aiming for a 1.0 release? >You should be, but I don't see any documentation of it anywhere. To the best of my knowledge, this is again a guideline, not a requirement. Are you saying we should or we must? We are striving for the "just enough process" Eclipse is advocating for. For now the project is going more towards frequent iterative drops, and making sure those both conform to the requirements, and make sense from a software engineering perspective. Cordially -- Cheers Philippe http://easyeclipse.org - http://phpeclipse.net - http://eclipse.org/atf -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bjorn Freeman-Benson Sent: Friday, August 03, 2007 9:30 AM To: [email protected]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; 'Bjorn Freeman-Benson' Subject: Re: [atf-dev] Open Mettings and getting the Source Code ATF Developers, Webtools PMC, I was disappointed to read this statement (below) in the atf-dev mailing list. A project is not open and transparent unless it is open and transparent all the time. My experience is that people (and groups of people; even me) always revert to base behavior under stress. In other words, if you can't stay open and transparent during a "heads down" cycle, then you aren't really committed to being open and transparent. Related to that, I browsed around your mailing list archives, newsgroup archives, and project website: Your 2.1 downloads do not have the word "incubation" in them. Your project is no longer "incubation-conforming". You are not using the standard Eclipse version numbering as 0.2.1 is not (in Eclipse naming) a milestone of 0.2. It should be something more like 0.2.1M4. I couldn't find a project plan. I found this roadmap but it's out of date. Plus it has no dates. Are you all doing Eclipse-standard six week milestones aiming for a 1.0 release? You should be, but I don't see any documentation of it anywhere. I see that code is being written, but I don't see much/any discussion of design, architecture, use cases, unit tests, or development in the dev mailing list. I looked at the ATF wiki. All but one of the pages haven't been touched for more than nine months. Etc. The project is just not being very open and transparent. The WTP PMC needs to crack down on the ATF project and either get them to be an open and transparent and Eclipse-like project or to reboot the project with a different team that will be. This could be a really cool project for Eclipse and the Eclipse community. But not as a closed-shop project with an open source repository. It's not good for Eclipse and it's not good for Webtools and it's not good for the ATF project itself. Bjorn Freeman-Benson Director, Open Source Process Eclipse Foundation voice: 971-327-7323 (Pacific Time) email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Robert Goodman Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2007 10:13 PM To: AJAX Toolkit Framework discussion Subject: Re: [atf-dev] Open Mettings and getting the Source Code Victor We do generally have an open meeting. At this time the team is heads down trying to get something out the door real soon and before I go on vacation. We are just having impromptu meetings until we get over the hump. I will send you a note, once we get the meetings started again. We are obviously interested in people who would like to contribute to the project. ... Thanks Bob Victor Osório <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 07/25/2007 01:14 PM Please respond to AJAX Toolkit Framework discussion <[email protected]> [EMAIL PROTECTED] cc Subject[atf-dev] Open Mettings and getting the Source Code Robert, We are interested in the ATF Project and we would like to know if the the project has Open Mettings. How we can participate from this meetings? _______________________________________________ atf-dev mailing list [email protected] https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/atf-dev
