Hi David, could you please clarify why exactly updates would be needed from projects because of changes to Orbit bundles? Does it result from the fact that Orbit bundles are actually re-bundled by project features? Or from the fact that requirements on them are specified too restrictive within project bundles or features?
I’m not sure if this is already covered by some simrel reports, but IMHO we would be pretty safe if we ensured that 1) no Orbit bundles were actually re-bundled in project features, but only required by them, and that 2) dependencies on Orbit bundles or packages would be specified in line with the respective Orbit main releases (based on proper version ranges), because the aggregation could then pretty much control which Orbit bundles get pulled in. If we would in addition impose the same restrictions on Orbit releases as on project releases (namely that updates including breaking changes are not allowed in maintenance releases), I would assume no project should actually have to update its contribution for a maintenance release. Cheers Alexander > Am 04.02.2016 um 21:43 schrieb Ed Willink <e...@willink.me.uk>: > > 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, >> >> Thanks for bringing this "no maintenance, no new Orbit" issue to my >> attention. >> >> While the Planning Council does not like to "make" people do extra work they >> would not normally do, I believe it was the intent of one of our >> requirements [1] that the latest Orbit be consumed every update release -- >> if there has been a new Orbit "released". Most often there is not a new >> Orbit release, since we in Orbit do that only for significant issues. This >> time, it was only for the 'commons.collections' security bug, and a bad bug >> in Ant 1.9.4 that drove us to provide Ant 1.9.6. [2]. >> >> While I will not say you *have* to update and provide a new build, I would >> encourage you to, as well as anyone else who uses "commons.collections" >> since we don't want to "spread around" a package that has known security >> flaw in it. >> >> As far as I know, in most cases of installing and updating people will get >> the correct, fixed version of that bundle, but am not positive that is >> always true so I hate for it to be the available from any of our "most >> recent repositories" (Simultaneous Release or not) -- after all, the b3 >> aggegator is including it for some reason -- so someone must say they >> require it? >> >> But I am also not the "security policeman" that will say that bundle must be >> expunged from all current downloads. (If I recall, the security issue only >> applied to specialized cases ... but, if you were running in that case, it >> was a bad security bug possibly leading to a malicious person "executing >> arbitrary commands". >> >> I have opened bug 487285 to investigate or discuss this issue further. [3] >> And, I will put this on future Planning Council agendas to see if we can >> word that requirement [1] better so that all projects know better what is >> expected of them. >> >> Thanks again, >> >> [1] >> <https://wiki.eclipse.org/SimRel/Simultaneous_Release_Requirements#Re-use_and_share_common_third_party_code_.28partially_tested.29>https://wiki.eclipse.org/SimRel/Simultaneous_Release_Requirements#Re-use_and_share_common_third_party_code_.28partially_tested.29 >> >> <https://wiki.eclipse.org/SimRel/Simultaneous_Release_Requirements#Re-use_and_share_common_third_party_code_.28partially_tested.29> >> [2] >> <https://dev.eclipse.org/mhonarc/lists/orbit-dev/msg04419.html>https://dev.eclipse.org/mhonarc/lists/orbit-dev/msg04419.html >> <https://dev.eclipse.org/mhonarc/lists/orbit-dev/msg04419.html> >> [3] >> <https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=487285>https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=487285 >> <https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=487285> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> From: Ed Willink <e...@willink.me.uk> <mailto:e...@willink.me.uk> >> To: cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org >> <mailto:cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org>, >> Date: 02/04/2016 01:12 AM >> Subject: Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Ready for Mars.2 ? >> Sent by: cross-project-issues-dev-boun...@eclipse.org >> <mailto:cross-project-issues-dev-boun...@eclipse.org> >> >> >> >> Hi David >> >> On 03/02/2016 22:29, David M Williams wrote: >> - Every contribution file has changed since Mars.1. Also good. (i.e. no >> projects are just sleeping and forgot to update :) >> >> You might want to review your query. qvtd.b3aggrcon was last changed by me >> on 26 June, and by you on 14 July. >> >> We are certainly not sleeping, and did not forget to update. Just working >> very hard to support the functionality required for graduation to 1.0.0. >> And ... worst of all, IMHO, some "old" third party jars are still being >> used, which implies to me someone is not using the latest version 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 >> >> Ed Willink_______________________________________________ >> 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, visit >> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev >> <https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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, visit >> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev >> <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 -- Dr. Alexander Nyßen Dipl.-Inform. Principal Engineer Telefon: +49 (0) 231 / 98 60-202 Telefax: +49 (0) 231 / 98 60-211 Mobil: +49 (0) 151 / 17396743 http://www.itemis.de alexander.nys...@itemis.de itemis AG Am Brambusch 15-24 44536 Lünen Rechtlicher Hinweis: Amtsgericht Dortmund, HRB 20621 Vorstand: Jens Wagener (Vors.), Wolfgang Neuhaus, Dr. Georg Pietrek, Jens Trompeter, Sebastian Neus Aufsichtsrat: Prof. Dr. Burkhard Igel (Vors.), Michael Neuhaus, Jennifer Fiorentino
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
_______________________________________________ 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
