I opened https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=406575 so that we can investigate merging the code back into JSDT.
I have not looked at the contribution yet, but I really like Wanye's idea
of providing the NJSDoc support in it own bundle - we follow a similar
pattern in JSDT Debug
where we have the core debug support and additional support is done via
separate bundles.
Michael Rennie
From: Wayne Beaton <wa...@eclipse.org>
To: wtp-dev@eclipse.org
Date: 24/04/2013 05:57 PM
Subject: Re: [wtp-dev] JavaScript Editor with NJSDoc
Sent by: wtp-dev-boun...@eclipse.org
Sorry to muddy the waters, but if the intent is to merge the fork back into
the JSDT project, can we hold off renaming the packages/bundles? I'd love
to hear from the JSDT project and PMC regarding the offer before we make
John change the code (the changes will make merging more challenging).
I took a quick look at the commit log and it does seem that you're only
modifying JSDT core. A lot of these changes appear to just be good
housekeeping sorts of things (lots of bug fixes) that I think would be good
to have back in the project.
It looks like you've modified the core bundle to support NJSDoc, rather
than extend via plug-in. Does it make sense to consider factoring out the
NJSDoc specific stuff into a separate bundle?
NJSDoc itself is EPL-licensed; are you thinking of contributing this to the
project as well?
Are you willing to join the project as a committer to support your
enhancements?
If not JSDT, might this code fit in with VJet?
John
On 04/24/2013 10:12 PM, Mike Milinkovich wrote:
John,
The end of the week is definitely fine. Thanks for your
understanding.
Mike Milinkovich
mike.milinkov...@eclipse.org
+1.613.220.3223
From: John Peberdy
Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2013 4:38 PM
To: mike.milinkov...@eclipse.org; General discussion of project-wide or
architectural issues.
Cc: lice...@eclipse.org; Ian Skerrett
Subject: Re: [wtp-dev] JavaScript Editor with NJSDoc
(Resending using the correct email address)
On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 12:57 PM, Mike Milinkovich <
mike.milinkov...@eclipse.org> wrote:
On 24/04/2013 7:56 AM, John Peberdy wrote:
Earlier this month I made this fork of JSDT available. While
working on this my goal was to have it eventually merged back in.
This is the reason it is currently using the same plugin names. I
would be very happy if it did get merged in. I would like to gauge
your interested in merging it.
John,
I hate to be the heavy, but I am duty-bound to point out that the
Eclipse Foundation considers its namespace as a trademark[1].
Fundamentally, we want the org.eclipse package names to denote code
that actually comes from Eclipse projects. Your continued use of
the org.eclipse package names is in violation of our trademark
policy.
It would be wonderful if your fork can be merged back into the JSDT
mainline code development. However, if that is not possible, we
would kindly ask that you modify your package names as soon as
possible.
Thanks for the feedback, trademark violation was not intentional. I
will change the name before the end of the week. If that is not soon
enough, let me know! I had not made the change sooner because I was
hoping that Eclipse would desire progress in JSDT.
[1] http://www.eclipse.org/legal/logo_guidelines.php
Best regards,
Mike Milinkovich
Executive Director,
Eclipse Foundation
_______________________________________________
wtp-dev mailing list
wtp-dev@eclipse.org
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/wtp-dev
--
John Peberdy
_______________________________________________
wtp-dev mailing list
wtp-dev@eclipse.org
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/wtp-dev
--
Wayne Beaton
Director of Open Source Projects, The Eclipse Foundation
Learn about Eclipse Projects
_______________________________________________
wtp-dev mailing list
wtp-dev@eclipse.org
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/wtp-dev
<<inline: graycol.gif>>
_______________________________________________ wtp-dev mailing list wtp-dev@eclipse.org https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/wtp-dev
