Hi Jonas Yes, the PMC will discuss it again, but as said, we would like to see how the adoption (e.g. via Marketplace) and feedback of those tools will be.
The suggestion is to add them to existing Luna EPPs where applicable/desired (up to package maintainers). Note that an EPP does not need to be marked as incubation, but only that it contains incubation projects, see e.g. [1]. Dani [1] http://www.eclipse.org/downloads/packages/eclipse-ide-automotive-software-developers-includes-incubating-components/keplersr1 From: Jonas Helming <jonas.helm...@googlemail.com> To: e4-dev@eclipse.org Date: 20.02.2014 13:15 Subject: Re: [e4-dev] e4 tools build moving to Luna? Sent by: e4-dev-boun...@eclipse.org Hi, to make sure that I get you correctly: You did not reach consensus, but you will discuss this again? IMHO, it would be great if you would come to a decision :-) You suggest to include the tools in some EPP (e.g. RCP/RAP Developers), but label the EP as "incubation" then? Or do you suggest to create a new EP? Do you suggest this for Luna or Luna +1? Best Regards Jonas Am 20.02.2014 07:44, schrieb Daniel Megert: We have discussed this in our weekly PMC meeting. We did not yet reach a consensus whether PDE is the right place. Three are very good arguments for it (better in PDE than in Platform, PDE has all the tools to build plug-ins, get new committers for PDE), but also some against (PDE is already too cluttered for OSGi developers, fear that PDE becomes a sink for any kind of tools that ease plug-in development, e.g. JDT tools, CDT tools, etc.). On the other hand we reached consensus that it is too late in the release to try to bring those tools out of incubation for Luna and we would also like to see a wider adoption and testing of the tools before we put them into the Platform. For that, we suggest to include the tools into some EPPs. This is possible even when still in incubation phase, but the package must be labelled accordingly. The tools should also be available via Marketplace (maybe they already are?). Dani From: Doug Schaefer <dschae...@qnx.com> To: E4 Project developer mailing list <e4-dev@eclipse.org> Date: 19.02.2014 21:46 Subject: Re: [e4-dev] e4 tools build moving to Luna? Sent by: e4-dev-boun...@eclipse.org I agree with the bar. That said, if it prevents the user from getting these important features, then you need to consider the exception. "Don?t f*** the user.? An important mantra we need to take seriously at Eclipse. Doug. From: Paul Webster <pwebs...@alumni.uwaterloo.ca> Reply-To: E4 Project developer mailing list <e4-dev@eclipse.org> Date: Wednesday, February 19, 2014 at 3:24 PM To: E4 Project developer mailing list <e4-dev@eclipse.org> Subject: Re: [e4-dev] e4 tools build moving to Luna? Some thoughts On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 5:27 AM, Lars Vogel <lars.vo...@gmail.com> wrote: Would be nice if we can migrate the editor to the PDE tools. I think were is some cleanup required in the model editor, for example we need to move to the new translation service. Dirk Fauth and I'm are working on it. The model editor uses also a special layout which looks really bad on the new dark theme I'm working on, so I plan to clean that up. Other than that I think we should be fine to move. Anyone interested in writing unit tests for the editor? I think that is required before we can move it to PDE. Btw. as M6 is API and M7 is feature freeze for Luna I think the move can only be done for Luna+1. I think PDE is the correct place for these tools to go. They could even remain separate features that could be gathered at the PDE UI feature level or at the Eclipse SDK product level (so not really tied to the PDE UI feature). Some concerns: 1) The tools need to be properly NLSed before they can graduate. 2) There should be some minimal JUnit test plugin so that as the editor plugins continue to evolve they can have their tests updated and they can be run as part of the build. I wouldn't expect it to be comprehensive, at least not at this point. I could help with the "can be run as part of the build" part. 3) to be included in the SDK they would need some docs, at least the editor description for the editor like http://help.eclipse.org/kepler/index.jsp?topic=%2Forg.eclipse.pde.doc.user%2Fguide%2Ftools%2Feditors%2Fproduct_editor%2Feditor.htm&cp=4_3_2_4 and possibly a page that describes how o.e.e4.tools.css.spy works. 4) The Eclipse SDK (including PDE) is a +0 component, and only depends on org.eclipse.emf.common.feature.group and org.eclipse.emf.ecore.feature.group. Those 2 EMF bundles are currently provided to us as a -0.5 component (the rest of EMF is a +1 component). So if the editor has other emf dependencies (I found at least org.eclipse.emf.edit) then we need to solve that build problem before it can graduate. It's not as simple as saying we'll just pull in that dependency. 5) I think Lars it right that the editor might need to go into Luna+1 6) I'd like to see org.eclipse.e4.tools.css.spy graduate for Luna, if we could. We still should put all of the features into the marketplace for our 0.15 stable build, as that was Kepler compatible. When Luna comes around, we should plan to make the latest versions of our e4 tools that are Luna compatible available in the marketplace as well. Later, Paul -- Paul Webster Hi floor. Make me a sammich! - GIR _______________________________________________ e4-dev mailing list e4-dev@eclipse.org https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/e4-dev _______________________________________________ e4-dev mailing list e4-dev@eclipse.org https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/e4-dev _______________________________________________ e4-dev mailing list e4-dev@eclipse.org https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/e4-dev
_______________________________________________ e4-dev mailing list e4-dev@eclipse.org https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/e4-dev
