Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Did I mess up our procedure for Neon? With respect to declaring, and enablement, and our "list of participants"?

Hi all, I do not see Graphiti appear in the list of participating projects, so I just repeat my mail back from August: Michael >Hi all, > >Graphiti will be participating in the Eclipse Neon Simultaneous release with >an offset of +3. > >We will contribute Graphiti 0.13.0 to Eclipse Neon:

Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Did I mess up our procedure for Neon? With respect to declaring, and enablement, and our "list of participants"?

On 21 Oct 2015, at 19:01, Gunnar Wagenknecht wrote: David, That brings up a good question ... The Gyrex project will continue to participate in the release train, but we'll no longer contribute to the release train repo. may i ask why ? -Gunnar -- Gunnar Wagenknecht

Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Did I mess up our procedure for Neon? With respect to declaring, and enablement, and our "list of participants"?

Here are the release records: Xtext 2.11.0 - https://projects.eclipse.org/projects/modeling.tmf.xtext/releases/2.11.0 MWE 2.9.0 - https://projects.eclipse.org/projects/modeling.emf.mwe/releases/2.9.0 Xpand 2.1.1 - https://projects.eclipse.org/projects/modeling.m2t.xpand/releases/2.1.1 2015-10-23

Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Did I mess up our procedure for Neon? With respect to declaring, and enablement, and our "list of participants"?

> Am 24.10.2015 um 07:56 schrieb Max Rydahl Andersen : >> That brings up a good question ... The Gyrex project will continue to >> participate in the release train, but we'll no longer contribute to the >> release train repo. > > may i ask why ? We only contribute(d)

Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Did I mess up our procedure for Neon? With respect to declaring, and enablement, and our "list of participants"?

Please create a release record. Thanks! Wayne On 22/10/15 09:19 AM, Fred Bricon wrote: m2e will contribute version 1.7 (most likely) to Neon, with a +2 offset. Fred On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 8:58 AM, Greg Watson > wrote: PTP/Remote

Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Did I mess up our procedure for Neon? With respect to declaring, and enablement, and our "list of participants"?

Please create a release record anyway. If you're not sure what the version number will be, make a good guess. I trust your good guesses. FWIW, you can just change the version name on the record later and everything will work. Wayne On 22/10/15 08:58 AM, Greg Watson wrote: PTP/Remote will

Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Did I mess up our procedure for Neon? With respect to declaring, and enablement, and our "list of participants"?

I think there was actually a mail last year that said, that projects from the previous year would participate automatically. In any case: Xtext intends to participate in Neon (offset +2) MWE intends to participate in Neon (offset +2) Xpand intends to participate in Neon (offset +2) It is not

Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Did I mess up our procedure for Neon? With respect to declaring, and enablement, and our "list of participants"?

Same here Riena will participate in Neon with offset+3. Version is 6.2. Regards christian Von: > on behalf of "Efftinge, Sven" > Antworten an:

Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Did I mess up our procedure for Neon? With respect to declaring, and enablement, and our "list of participants"?

Buildship will participate in Neon with +1 offset and with version 2.0.0. Best regards, Donát 2015-10-22 8:37 GMT+02:00 Christian Campo : > Same here…. Riena will participate in Neon with offset+3. Version is 6.2. > > Regards > christian > > Von:

Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Did I mess up our procedure for Neon? With respect to declaring, and enablement, and our "list of participants"?

On 21.10.15 16:01, David M Williams wrote: > Just today I realized I think I was supposed to "disable" everyone, > until they responded affirmatively that they were participating in Neon. > > Since so many have declared their intent already, I hate to start over, > by disabling everyone, but,

Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Did I mess up our procedure for Neon? With respect to declaring, and enablement, and our "list of participants"?

CDO will contribute its version 4.5.0 to Neon. The offset stays at +2. Oomph will contribute its version 1.4.0 to Neon. The offset stays at +3. Cheers /Eike http://www.esc-net.de http://thegordian.blogspot.com http://twitter.com/eikestepper

Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Did I mess up our procedure for Neon? With respect to declaring, and enablement, and our "list of participants"?

PTP/Remote will be in Neon. Versions unknown at this point. Greg ___ 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

Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Did I mess up our procedure for Neon? With respect to declaring, and enablement, and our "list of participants"?

m2e will contribute version 1.7 (most likely) to Neon, with a +2 offset. Fred On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 8:58 AM, Greg Watson wrote: > > PTP/Remote will be in Neon. Versions unknown at this point. > > Greg > ___ >

[cross-project-issues-dev] Did I mess up our procedure for Neon? With respect to declaring, and enablement, and our "list of participants"?

Just today I realized I think I was supposed to "disable" everyone, until they responded affirmatively that they were participating in Neon. Since so many have declared their intent already, I hate to start over, by disabling everyone, but, need to come up with a list of "those who have

Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Did I mess up our procedure for Neon? With respect to declaring, and enablement, and our "list of participants"?

David, That brings up a good question ... The Gyrex project will continue to participate in the release train, but we'll no longer contribute to the release train repo. -Gunnar -- Gunnar Wagenknecht gun...@wagenknecht.org, http://guw.io/ > Am 21.10.2015 um 07:01 schrieb David M

Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Did I mess up our procedure for Neon? With respect to declaring, and enablement, and our "list of participants"?

I'll update the list. Wayne On 21/10/15 10:01 AM, David M Williams wrote: Wayne have you been keeping track? So far, the list at https://projects.eclipse.org/releases/neon only shows "Eclipse" is participating. I assume that's set to always be true. :) But the rest need someone to enter the

Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Did I mess up our procedure for Neon? With respect to declaring, and enablement, and our "list of participants"?

We did declare CDT for Neon, referring to your now famous line :-) "CDT will be in every simultaneous release from the first one until forever. " https://dev.eclipse.org/mhonarc/lists/cross-project-issues-dev/msg12209.html From:

Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Did I mess up our procedure for Neon? With respect to declaring, and enablement, and our "list of participants"?

Not sure you noticed but Equinox only declared for Neon just now. Would have been interesting to see what happens if you disabled Equinox. Tom From: David M Williams/Raleigh/IBM@IBMUS To: cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org Date: 10/21/2015 09:15 AM Subject:

Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Did I mess up our procedure for Neon? With respect to declaring, and enablement, and our "list of participants"?

A man after my own heart :). I can’t remember if CDT declared for Neon. It’ll be a sad day the release we don’t. Doug. From: > on behalf of Thomas Watson

Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Did I mess up our procedure for Neon? With respect to declaring, and enablement, and our "list of participants"?

Thanks for letting us know, Gunnar. I'll remove your b3aggrcon file from master. You'll still need to do a release record. :) From: Gunnar Wagenknecht To: Cross project issues , Date: 10/21/2015 01:02 PM Subject:

Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Did I mess up our procedure for Neon? With respect to declaring, and enablement, and our "list of participants"?

David, I suppose it's hard to disable EMF and still have a Platform. Even disabling XSD would presumably disable WTP. I think most of us make an assumption that the projects on the train last year, particularly projects on which we might depend, will be on the train next year.

Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Did I mess up our procedure for Neon? With respect to declaring, and enablement, and our "list of participants"?

:). Thanks, Marc. BTW, my point really is that I don’t think it should be so easy for projects to come and go on the release train. Assuming people are using the contributions of the project, it would be unsettling for them to be removed all of a sudden in the next release. If the impact is