[cross-project-issues-dev] Missing release information for some Kepler projects
I am missing release information for the following projects that have declared intent to participate in Kepler. C/C++ Development Tools (CDT) Dynamic Languages Toolkit (DLTK) Eclipse Modeling Framework (EMF) Eclipse Communication Framework (ECF) Runtime Packaging Project (RTP) EclipseLink Ecore Tools Extended Editing Framework (EEF) Jubula Functional Testing Tool MDT XSD (XML Schema Definition) Maven Integration for Web Tools Platform SCA Tools In some cases, it may be that I just can't sort out what release you want to include, or maybe you're planning to include a release that does not occur on the Kepler release date (which I find weird, but is otherwise okay). If you have not done so already, please visit your project's information page and create a release record for Kepler and then please let me know either on this list or via direct email so that I can update the Kepler release page. I will not accept review documentation for any release that is not recorded in the project metadata. While you're there, please take a few minutes to update the description and plan information for your release. The description should be a short paragraph that concisely describes the high points of the release. Note that you can still use the old XML-file based plan format if you like using old and painful technology. You can quickly get access to your project's information page directly from the Kepler release page: https://projects.eclipse.org/releases/kepler Let me know if you require any assistance. Wayne -- Wayne Beaton Director of Open Source Projects, The Eclipse Foundation Learn about Eclipse Projects ___ 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] Kepler dates, IP Logs, and reviews
Kepler approaches. I'm starting to get IP Log review requests for the upcoming release. In at least two cases, I'm pretty sure that the submitter thought that the release date was in May. To be clear, here are the dates: May 24/2013 - Deadline to submit IP Logs for Kepler releases June 5/2013 - PMC-approved Review materials submitted to EMO June 12/2013 - Kepler Uber Release review June 26/2013 - Kepler release The IP Logs are not due for another month. It's still a little early, but it's perfectly acceptable to submit your IP log for review in advance of the actual required-by date. Just keep in mind that the log needs to accurately reflect the content that you're releasing; if you anticipate receiving any contributions from folks who are not committers, it might be a good idea to hold off for a while. While I'm at it, I'd like to make a plea to everybody to please try and honour the dates specified. There are a few projects that make a habit of submitting the required materials late; this causes a lot of stress for everybody involved. If you haven't started thinking about your IP Log and review documentation, now might be a good time to do so. I need to have you PMC-approved review documentation before EOB on June 5/2013. You can either do what we've been doing for years and submit this information as a presentation, document, PDF, or whatever. Or you can just enter review information directly in the release record in the Project Management Infrastructure. A few of you have already started doing the latter; my sense is that it is an easy way to assemble and provide this information. Please let me know if you think otherwise, or if there is anything that we can do to improve it. The PMC approval part is important. Get it approved. This may take some time. Plan to engage your PMC at least a full week in advance of the June 5 deadline. PMC members, please make sure that the document is complete and that you are satisfied with its content before providing your approval. When I look at the extremely short (or non-existent) "outside contributions" sections on some IP logs, I grow concerned that some projects aren't doing enough to court the community and grow diversity. Please use the Release Review checklist to make sure that you've done all the necessary bits: http://wiki.eclipse.org/Development_Resources/HOWTO/Release_Reviews#Checklist Note that this checklist has been around for a long time. There should be nothing new or surprising here. I've noticed that a lot of projects do not have plans posted. This is an important and necessary part of the development process. Plan information can be entered directly in the release record in the Project Management Infrastructure. Providing a project plan in a standard format is required. Wrestling with XML is no longer required. It's easy. Please make this happen. Note that planning should happen at the beginning of a release cycle. PMCs, please impress the importance of this on your projects. Thanks, Wayne -- Wayne Beaton on behalf of the Eclipse Foundation ___ 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] Can't push changes to the "*.b3aggrcon" file in the b3 aggregator
Hi, I changed the Kepler b3aggregator configuration to pull JWT from the Kepler update site and then committed but when I try to "Push to upstream", I get the following error: ssh://aw...@git.eclipse.org/gitroot/simrel/org.eclipse.simrel.build.git: error occurred during unpacking on the remote end: unpack-objects abnormal exit Has anyone else faced this problem before or am I doing something wrong? Thanks in advance. best regards, Samir ___ 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] Heads up -- if you use the Eclipse Platform's Test Framework
We are making some changes to our "org.eclipse.test" bundle (the core of "Test Framework") so that two files (library.xml and JUNIT.XSL) are moved "out" of that bundle and moved elsewhere. So, if you use the test framework to run your own automated tests (and format the results) you may have to make some changes once you start to Kepler M7 to run your tests. I know some projects, such as WTP, already use their own custom library.xml so in cases like that, there should be no impact. But, for others, it might require a change. And, in looking to "fix" our documentation to describe this, I have found the documentation to be "beyond repair" ... it is so out of date. So to fix the documentation we'll be moving much of it to the wiki so it will be easier to keep up to date (with the help of everyone who uses it) over the months/years ahead. Bug 406646 [1] is where we will track the documentation work, and its comment 0 has all the info you need to know, if you do need to react to changes in the test framework. (such as new location of library.xml and JUNIT.XSL). So, please read, follow, comment there as we make progress on fixing the documentation. I just wanted to give this early warning in case anyone knows it will impact you, or in case you notice the test framework doesn't work the next time you try to use it with a recent build. Thanks, [1] https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=406646 ___ cross-project-issues-dev mailing list cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev
