Community
Participate
Working Groups
I ran a "layout" test, and, according it it, about 10% of the bundles in the Indigo RC2 repo are missing about.html files (or, epl/license files, in features). These are often caused by incorrect "build.properties", or similar ... or, I'm sure, in some cases, really missing. That percentage seems "better" than last year ... but, still a lot to fix. I'll attach complete list. (And, remember ... it is possible the test is in error ... so if anyone finds an error in the reported list, be sure to let me know). Be sure to ask if questions or problems ... hopefully these can all be corrected for RC3.
Created attachment 196616 [details] list from RC2 staging repo that are missing critical files
assigned to myself just to minimize mail notices (I won't be fixing them :) Also, meant to add ... this just checks "file system" so does not include "trusted repos" from Eclipse and EPP ... we assume they check their own. :) ... so that effects some "total number" statistics.
The two that were missing from Acceleo and EMF Compare have now been fixed.
All the com.mongodb components are Apache licensed: http://dev.eclipse.org/ipzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4889 Am I supposed to add the EPL in addition?
fixed riena
I've fixed the 3 issues with Object Teams for RC3.
I was surprised to see these 34 bundles: Missing about.html in file: org.eclipse.e4.xwt.pde_0.9.1.v20101119-0800.jar Missing about.html in file: org.eclipse.e4.xwt_0.9.1.v20101119-0800.jar If you are not including the Eclipse top-level project in your scan, this suggests another project is distributing e4 bundles??
(In reply to comment #7) > I was surprised to see these 34 bundles: (I meant e4, not 34)
(In reply to comment #4) > All the com.mongodb components are Apache licensed: > http://dev.eclipse.org/ipzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4889 > > Am I supposed to add the EPL in addition? Not the "EPL license", per se ... but every features needs standard "Eclipse Software User Agreement" and every bundle requires an about.html that describes the license (and where to find the license) ... is my understanding. See http://www.eclipse.org/legal/guidetolegaldoc.php (and check with Eclipse IP Legal staff if that's not clear or if you have special cases).
(In reply to comment #7) > I was surprised to see these 34 bundles: > > Missing about.html in file: org.eclipse.e4.xwt.pde_0.9.1.v20101119-0800.jar > Missing about.html in file: org.eclipse.e4.xwt_0.9.1.v20101119-0800.jar > > If you are not including the Eclipse top-level project in your scan, this > suggests another project is distributing e4 bundles?? Yes. papyrus re-distributes these two. Which I know because of previous build breaks :) and, better, I just checked the log created during RC2 creation. You can search for "e4.xwt", seeing it being mirrored, and then "look up" in log to see what the last project repo was mentioned in log. So ... guess the question remains ... does e4 need the about.html file :) ... or are they just using an old, out of date file? Just FYI, I also noticed rg.eclipse.e4.core.di,0.9.0.v20100720-1930 in the log following gyrex. That's one thing we've learned about Eclipse over the years ... you never know who is doing what with your stuff :)
I've fixed the CDO issues. Sorry for the mistake.
fixed for EEF. will be available for RC3
I have fixed for papyrus see bug 347407: https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=347407
Libra bundles are fixed: bug 347507. Corrections will be available with the RC4 milestone.
(In reply to comment #14) > Libra bundles are fixed: bug 347507. Corrections will be available with the RC4 > milestone. Xtext, Xpand, Xtend and MWE fixed bug 347359. @David How can I run your "layout" test against my repository. I would like to integrate it into our build process.
The missing legal files in RAP have been fixed. But there is one strange thing: The attached list contains two bundles from the sandbox in the RAP CVS which are not meant to be released in the Indigo repository. I'm not sure who includes these bundles but it's not RAP: org.eclipse.rwt.widgets.upload.source_1.0.0.v20110503_R14-M7.jar org.eclipse.rwt.widgets.upload_1.0.0.v20110503_R14-M7.jar Is there a way to find out which feature includes these bundles?
(In reply to comment #16) > org.eclipse.rwt.widgets.upload.source_1.0.0.v20110503_R14-M7.jar > org.eclipse.rwt.widgets.upload_1.0.0.v20110503_R14-M7.jar > > Is there a way to find out which feature includes these bundles? http://download.eclipse.org/releases/staging/content.jar tells me that they are required by org.eclipse.gyrex.admin.ui.http.jetty org.eclipse.gyrex.admin.ui -> optional==true org.eclipse.gyrex.features.admin.feature.group org.eclipse.gyrex.features.admin.source.feature.group
Fixed for Jubula in RC3
Apologies, I forgot to announce here that org.eclipse.ocl.examples.* bundles have been fixed (Bug 347327). P.S: As David commented it was a matter of fixing the build.properties files. Cheers, Adolfo.
Fixed Modeling Amalgamation for RC3
Fixed BIRT plugin org.eclipse.birt.report.engine.odf.
fixed for Scout for RC4 (missing RC3)
Progress is being made ... but slowly, considering this is last few days to fix. Still 5 features, almost 200 bundles. That's better than the 16 features and 400 bundles as of RC2 ... but ... I have a feeling we will be calling a few people at home. :) if they are not off the list soon. You can always see the most recent list at http://build.eclipse.org/indigo/simrel/reports/layoutCheck.txt good luck!
(In reply to comment #23) I've fixed the epl files for Object Teams for the second time: first time I added epl-v1.0.html, now I know that the file name must not have a dot to mark version 1.0, sigh.
Fixed for EMF Compare ... I forgot some of the plugins when I last checked :S.
Fixed it for org.pushingpixels.trident, since Riena is probably the only project using it.
Fixed in CDT. We will respin our RC4 to pick this up.
Fixed it for org.eclipse.nebula.widgets.compositetable_1.0.0.jar.
All clean in our RC4 repo http://build.eclipse.org/indigo/simrel/ I looked at last years effort, see bug 316720. I was wrong about one thing, the percentage of bundles missing "legal files" was about the same both years, roughly 10%. And, if people thought this year was "last minute", last year these were discovered and fixed _after_ RC4, during quiet week, from 6/14 to 6/17. This year, the first report came out after RC2, on 5/25, but I think got lost during RC3 week due to the infrastructure issues. But, still a testament to everyone's ability and professionalism to get them fixed up by 6/10, before RC4 declared. Thanks everyone!
