Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] DLTK in Luna ?

[Alexey Panchenko]

Hi,

The current status is:
- I recently changed version to 5.1 on master
- going to contribute it to Luna ~RC1
- there should not be any compatibility problems

Regards,
Alex


On Wed, May 7, 2014 at 6:14 PM, Simon Bernard
wrote:

> We still got no answer about DLTK integration in Luna.
> Currently, in SimRel, DLTK is only at v5.0.0 (Kepler version).
> Hoping, we will not face last-minute compatibility problems.
> Simon
>
> Le vendredi 18 avril 2014 à 08:46 -0700, Simon Bernard a écrit :
> > Hi,
> > I have few questions about the next dltk integration in
> > Luna :
> >  Does an update site exist to test the next version of DLTK (5.1)?
> >  Currenlty, there still are the dltk 5.0 version, do you plan to
> > integrate a development version of DLTK (5.1) for M7 of Luna ?
> > Thx.
> > Simon
> > ___
> > 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
>
___
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] DLTK Participation in Luna

[Alexey Panchenko]

Hi,

DLTK will participate in Luna at offset is +2
Release record
https://projects.eclipse.org/projects/technology.dltk/releases/5.1.0

Regards,
Alex
___
cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev

Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Luna participation intent to participate reminder

[Alexey Panchenko]

Koneki was announced -
http://dev.eclipse.org/mhonarc/lists/cross-project-issues-dev/msg09827.html
I just remember that because of dependency on DLTK.

Regards,
Alex


On Tue, Oct 8, 2013 at 9:48 PM, Wayne Beaton  wrote:

>  I have a current total of 47 projects that have stated their intent to
> participate. This is a fair bit short of the 71 projects we had for Kepler.
>
> The instructions for announcing are here:
>
>
> http://wiki.eclipse.org/SimRel/Simultaneous_Release_Requirements#State_intent_early_.28M4.29
>
> We're still well in advance of the M4 opt-in deadline (December 20), so
> it's not time to panic yet.
>
> I will be looking for at least a tentative plan (with at least a
> description, and one topic listed) before the M4 deadline.
>
> Below is the the projects did participate in Kepler, but have not yet
> announced their participation for Luna.
>
> PMC planning council representatives, please make sure that your projects
> understand the participation requirements.
>
> eclipse.orion
> modeling.amalgam
> modeling.amp
> modeling.emf.query
> modeling.emf.transaction
> modeling.emf.validation
> modeling.emft.eef
> modeling.gmp.gmf-notation
> modeling.gmp.gmf-runtime
> modeling.gmp.gmf-tooling
> modeling.mdt.modisco
> mylyn.context.mft
> rt.ecf
> rt.eclipselink
> rt.riena
> soa.bpel
> soa.sca
> technology.dltk
> technology.koneki
> technology.m2e
> technology.m2e.m2e-wtp
> technology.packaging
> technology.packaging.mpc
> tools.cdt.tcf
> tools.gef
> tools.pdt
> tools.tm
>
> Thanks,
>
> Wayne
> --
> Wayne Beaton
> Director of Open Source Projects, The Eclipse 
> Foundation
> Learn about Eclipse Projects 
> [image: EclipseCon Europe 2013] 
>
> ___
> cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
> cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev
>
>
Title: Luna participation areminder


  
I have a current total of 47 projects that have stated their intent
to participate. This is a fair bit short of the 71 projects we had
for Kepler.

The instructions for announcing are here:


http://wiki.eclipse.org/SimRel/Simultaneous_Release_Requirements#State_intent_early_.28M4.29

We're still well in advance of the M4 opt-in deadline (December 20),
so it's not time to panic yet.

I will be looking for at least a tentative plan (with at least a
description, and one topic listed) before the M4 deadline.

Below is the the projects did participate in Kepler, but have not
yet announced their participation for Luna. 

PMC planning council representatives, please make sure that your
projects understand the participation requirements.

eclipse.orion
modeling.amalgam
modeling.amp
modeling.emf.query
modeling.emf.transaction
modeling.emf.validation
modeling.emft.eef
modeling.gmp.gmf-notation
modeling.gmp.gmf-runtime
modeling.gmp.gmf-tooling
modeling.mdt.modisco
mylyn.context.mft
rt.ecf
rt.eclipselink
rt.riena
soa.bpel
soa.sca
technology.dltk
technology.koneki
technology.m2e
technology.m2e.m2e-wtp
technology.packaging
technology.packaging.mpc
tools.cdt.tcf
tools.gef
tools.pdt
tools.tm

Thanks,

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

Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] 6 month release cycle

[Alexey Panchenko]

Ideally, all the project tests should be executed - using dependencies from
the simultaneous release repository.

Also, some checks of the compiled classes should be made (e.g. load them
all?), to verify that dependencies in the repository are compatible with
those used at compile time.

Regards,
Alex

On Thu, Jul 4, 2013 at 11:36 AM, Ed Willink  wrote:

> Hi
>
> Good point.
>
> Perhaps a condition of participation in a Package would be contribution of
> a very small smoke test plugin that demonstrates that the participant has
> some plausible activity after installation. These could form the basis of
> an automated package test that would uncover many missing dependencies.
>
> For instance for OCL, I already have tests that do a minimal amount of
> editor liveness testing on an example project, which gives me some
> confidence that Xtext is still there in a useable fashion.
>
> Regards
>
> Ed Willink
>
>
>
> On 04/07/2013 10:25, Pascal Rapicault wrote:
>
>> I would go even further, are the current packages really tested anyway?
>> There are probably a couple ppl opening them up to see if things are at
>> the right place but I can't imagine that a heavy testing is done.
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: 
>> cross-project-issues-dev-**boun...@eclipse.org[mailto:
>> cross-project-issues-**dev-boun...@eclipse.org]
>> On Behalf Of Thomas Hallgren
>> Sent: July-04-13 5:20 AM
>> To: 
>> cross-project-issues-dev@**eclipse.org
>> Subject: Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] 6 month release cycle
>>
>> On 2013-07-03 23:42, Ian Bull wrote:
>>
>>> While I do think most of this could be automated -- including the
>>> creation of the packages -- we need to question if this will inevitably
>>> reduce quality.
>>>
>> I think quality comes from extensive automated testing and then hands-on
>> usage. A fully automated release process would of course cover the first.
>> So the question is really, do we want our users to do the hands-on testing
>> for us? That in turn, begs the question, aren't we doing that already?
>> Assuming that many projects do, then a more frequent release cycle will
>> actually increase quality, not the opposite. And it shortens the bug-fixing
>> cycle dramatically.
>>
>> - thomas
>>
>> __**_
>> 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
>>
>>
>> -
>>
>> No virus found in this message.
>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>> Version: 2013.0.3345 / Virus Database: 3204/6462 - Release Date: 07/03/13
>>
>>
>>
> __**_
> 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

Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Missing release information for some Kepler projects

[Alexey Panchenko]

Hi,

I've finally managed to updated DLTK contribution to the latest build.
When it will be picked up by the release process, to verify the results?

Regards,
Alex


On Fri, May 10, 2013 at 12:52 PM, Jacek Pospychała <
jacek.pospych...@gmail.com> wrote:

> hi,
>
> PDT has been building and testing against DLTK-nightly builds for last
> months, so we prefer DLTK 5.0.
>
> thanks,
> Jacek
>
>
> On Thu, May 9, 2013 at 5:49 PM, Alexey Panchenko  > wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Unfortunately The DLTK team were quite busy this year with other
>> projects. Initially the previous (4.0, released 2012) version was added to
>> Kepler, with the intent to replace it later with the 5.0 builds from
>> master. So far, that did not happen yet, partly because of source control
>> (-> git) & build system (-> tycho) changes.
>>
>> AFAIK DLTK is used by PDT and Koneki-Lua Development Tools.
>> So the question to these projects: what DLTK version would you prefer in
>> Kepler?
>>
>> Regards,
>> Alex
>>
>>
>> On Thu, May 9, 2013 at 12:26 AM, Wayne Beaton  wrote:
>>
>>>  I am now only missing the information for the DLTK and Runtime
>>> Packaging (RTP) project. I have contacted DLTK via their mailing list; Ian
>>> has contacted the RTP project leaders directly (thanks, Ian).
>>>
>>> I noticed that DLTK is contributing their 4.0 release build (from Juno)
>>> to Kepler, despite there being some apparent activity in the project Git
>>> repositories. I don't know if there is any specific issue with this, but
>>> thought that I'd point it out in case any downstream consumers had any
>>> concerns/issues.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>>
>>> Wayne
>>>
>>> On 04/26/2013 02:38 PM, Wayne Beaton wrote:
>>>
>>> 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<http://www.eclipse.org>
>>> Learn about Eclipse Projects <http://www.eclipse.org/projects>
>>> [image: EclipseCon France 2013] <http://www.eclipsecon.org/france2013>
>>>
>>>
>>> ___
>>> cross-project-issues-dev mailing 
>>> listcross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.orghttps://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Wayne Beaton
>>> Director of Open Source Projects, The Eclipse 
>>> Foundation<http://www.eclipse.org>
>>> Learn about Eclipse Projects <http://www.eclipse.org/projects>
>>> [image: EclipseCon France 2013] <http://www.eclipsecon.org/france2013>
>>>
>>> ___
>>> 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
>>
>>
>
> ___
> cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
> cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev
>
>
<<480x60.png>><>___
cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev

Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Missing release information for some Kepler projects

[Alexey Panchenko]

Hi,

Unfortunately The DLTK team were quite busy this year with other projects.
Initially the previous (4.0, released 2012) version was added to Kepler,
with the intent to replace it later with the 5.0 builds from master. So
far, that did not happen yet, partly because of source control (-> git) &
build system (-> tycho) changes.

AFAIK DLTK is used by PDT and Koneki-Lua Development Tools.
So the question to these projects: what DLTK version would you prefer in
Kepler?

Regards,
Alex


On Thu, May 9, 2013 at 12:26 AM, Wayne Beaton  wrote:

>  I am now only missing the information for the DLTK and Runtime Packaging
> (RTP) project. I have contacted DLTK via their mailing list; Ian has
> contacted the RTP project leaders directly (thanks, Ian).
>
> I noticed that DLTK is contributing their 4.0 release build (from Juno) to
> Kepler, despite there being some apparent activity in the project Git
> repositories. I don't know if there is any specific issue with this, but
> thought that I'd point it out in case any downstream consumers had any
> concerns/issues.
>
> Thanks,
>
>
> Wayne
>
> On 04/26/2013 02:38 PM, Wayne Beaton wrote:
>
> 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 
> [image: EclipseCon France 2013] 
>
>
> ___
> cross-project-issues-dev mailing 
> listcross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.orghttps://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev
>
>
> --
> Wayne Beaton
> Director of Open Source Projects, The Eclipse 
> Foundation
> Learn about Eclipse Projects 
> [image: EclipseCon France 2013] 
>
> ___
> cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
> cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev
>
>
<<480x60.png>><>___
cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev

Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Status and readiness for Kepler M1

[Alexey Panchenko]

Hi David,

DLTK is going to participate, we are just short on time these days.
I've just enabled our contribution (for now with the same content as for
Juno release).

Regards,
Alex

On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 12:09 PM, David M Williams <
david_willi...@us.ibm.com> wrote:

> Still 26 projects not enabled for Kepler M1.
>
> Can some one explain to me what this is about? Some passive aggressive
> protest? Too many people take vacation all summer and don't even check
> Eclipse mailing lists?
> Are projects just indecisive and think a commitment now means it is a
> written in stone promise (which is never the case).
> I know one or two people have mentioned they have special problems that
> will likely prevent participation in M1, but,
> If I hear nothing, I'll assume the remaining 24 or so are dropping out,
> and will remove those files from the 'master'  branch.
> For those projects to rejoin later will take an exception since there's a
> requirement for those participating to "keep participating" or else inform
> us all you no longer plan to.
> The M4 deadline only applies to branch new projects, others (in previous
> release) expected to be in M1.
>
> http://wiki.eclipse.org/SimRel/Simultaneous_Release_Requirements#Integrate_Early_and_Often
>
> I should emphasize, if people do not want to be in sim. release, that's
> fine. It is a voluntary choice, and does take some amount of extra work.
> So, it doesn't mean you are a "bad project" or anything if you decide not
> to.
> But, it is only common courtesy to keep us informed explicitly.
>
> Thanks,
>
>
>
> amp.b3aggrcon - org.eclipse.simrel.build
> cdt.b3aggrcon - org.eclipse.simrel.build
> dltk.b3aggrcon - org.eclipse.simrel.build
> emf-query2.b3aggrcon - org.eclipse.simrel.build
> emft-ecoretools.b3aggrcon - org.eclipse.simrel.build
> emft-eef.b3aggrcon - org.eclipse.simrel.build
> emft-egf.b3aggrcon - org.eclipse.simrel.build
> emft-emffacet.b3aggrcon - org.eclipse.simrel.build
> epp-mpc.b3aggrcon - org.eclipse.simrel.build
> gmp-gmf-tooling.b3aggrcon - org.eclipse.simrel.build
> gyrex.b3aggrcon - org.eclipse.simrel.build
> jwt.b3aggrcon - org.eclipse.simrel.build
> mat.b3aggrcon - org.eclipse.simrel.build
> mdt-modisco.b3aggrcon - org.eclipse.simrel.build
> mdt-papyrus.b3aggrcon - org.eclipse.simrel.build
> mft.b3aggrcon - org.eclipse.simrel.build
> mylyn-docs-intent.b3aggrcon - org.eclipse.simrel.build
> pdt.b3aggrcon - org.eclipse.simrel.build
> rap.b3aggrcon - org.eclipse.simrel.build
> recommenders.b3aggrcon - org.eclipse.simrel.build
> rtp.b3aggrcon - org.eclipse.simrel.build
> scout.b3aggrcon - org.eclipse.simrel.build
> soa-bpel.b3aggrcon - org.eclipse.simrel.build
> soa-sca.b3aggrcon - org.eclipse.simrel.build
> tcf.b3aggrcon - org.eclipse.simrel.build
> tm.b3aggrcon - org.eclipse.simrel.build
>
>
> ___
> 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

Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Hudson using only 2 executor threads ?

[Alexey Panchenko]

LinkageError is still there:
https://hudson.eclipse.org/hudson/job/dltk-nightly/scmPollLog/

On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 21:47, Matthew Heitz  wrote:
> Adding executors has resulted in the return of the LinkageError.  *sigh*
>
> java.io.IOException: Remote call on hudson-slave1 failed
>                 at hudson.remoting.Channel.call(Channel.java:659)
>                 at hudson.FilePath.act(FilePath.java:747)
>                 ... 10 more
> Caused by: java.lang.LinkageError: loader (instance of
>  hudson/remoting/RemoteClassLoader): attempted  duplicate class definition
> for name: "hudson/model/AbstractProject"
>
>  -Matt
>
>
>
>
>
>
> From:        Denis Roy 
> To:        cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org,
> Date:        02/02/2012 08:58 PM
> Subject:        Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Hudson using only 2 executor
> threads ?
> Sent by:        cross-project-issues-dev-boun...@eclipse.org
> 
>
>
>
> I've increased the executors to 6 until we can resolve the issues with the
> new slaves.  That should help clear things up.
>
> Denis
>
> On 02/02/2012 07:44 PM, Matthias Sohn wrote:
> Currently there is a huge queue of 17 Hudson build jobs waiting for an
> executor thread.
> It seems only 2 threads are used. Could someone having the license kick
> Hudson to
> use more threads ?
>
> --
> Matthias
>
>
> ___
> 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
>
>
> ___
> 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