Thanks David. I'll be looking for this during release reviews.
Wayne
On 04/08/2013 10:14 AM, David M
Williams wrote:
I spent some time
improving the "provider
names" report, mostly for bug 400235. So it should be more
accurate
now.
http://build.eclipse.org/simrel/kepler/reporeports/reports/providerNames.html
Besides the appalling number of
cases
of "null" or "unknown" given for "Provider name"
(which has always been true) I noticed a number of cases where
people were
giving the name of a company for provider name ... this is ok
for a bundle
that is a true "third party" bundle, but ... seems a fairly
large
number have been introduced for "org.eclipse .... " bundles.
This seems wrong ... sort of against the spirit of Eclipse. The
"Provider
Name" should be "Eclipse <project name>". Here's a
few that stood out ... but, could be others.
org.eclipse.gemini.jpa 1.1.0.RC1
Oracle Corporation
org.eclipse.libra.framework.core
0.3.0.201212132137
Eteration A.S.
org.eclipse.ptp.rm.ibm.platform.lsf.ui
1.0.0.201303201633
IBM
org.eclipse.emf.diffmerge.sdk.feature.feature.group
0.1.0.v20121203-0924
Thales Global Services S.A.S.
Please fix as many of these
"Provider
Names" as possible ... it'll make Eclipse look much more
professional
when people look at the "about box" and similar.
Thanks,
[1] https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=400235
_______________________________________________
cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev
|
_______________________________________________
cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev