On Wed, Jan 29, 2020 at 9:23 AM Dietrich, Christian < christian.dietr...@itemis.de> wrote:
> Resources that we won't have this year.Thus is see this a burden for many > smaller and less > resourced projects. Can you please explicit what you mean by "this" in "see this a burden" ? The fact that project doesn't have resource to keep activity isn't a problem SimRel can or should deal with IMO. If there is no-one interested in shipping XText in EPP packages and testing it as part of the package, then what's the point in aggregating it? > I am not sure if a pull approach would solve this > problem as there still needs to be common ground for projects that > need to depend on each other. No EMF would mean no Platform, Xtext, > OCL etc. There is still a common ground, it's just defined in EPP as a target-platform or whatever similar and it's controlled by EPP contributors, not by projects who aren't investing in SimRel/EPP. Platform successfully uses EMF without SimRel and everything works, so this big common ground isn't something that's strongly required for projects to be functional. The deal becomes that if a project wants to be in EPP/SimRel, they have to invest in testing and maintenance of EPP/SimRel. Currently, it's not the case, and many SimRel contributions behave as "freeloaders" of others work. If you want EMF to be and healthy project, then join me in reducing the amount of effort Ed M spends on cross-project stuff, so he'll be more available for EMF if he wants to ;) Any energy taken by SimRel/EPP is energy that's not placed someplace else; in many cases, the energy would be better getting directly in the projects rather than in the aggregation.
_______________________________________________ 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://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev
