[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
|
RE: [cdt-dev] FW: CDT/embedded sessions at EclipseCon
|
OK, thanks for the comments on this.
How about we have a quick conf. call on Thursday, either at 12PM or 4PM EST?
Thanks,
Sebastien
> -----Original Message-----
> From: cdt-dev-admin@xxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:cdt-dev-admin@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Greg Watson
> Sent: Tuesday, January 25, 2005 9:44 AM
> To: cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [cdt-dev] FW: CDT/embedded sessions at EclipseCon
>
> From the point of view of the parallel tools platform,
> support for remote source and the ability to both build and
> launch remotely is something I think will be an important
> requirement in the future. I'd certainly be interested in
> discussing this issue.
>
> Greg Watson
> Advanced Computing Lab, Los Alamos National Laboratory
>
> On Jan 25, 2005, at 5:44 AM, Douglas Schaefer wrote:
>
> > Hi Mary,
> >
> > When we talk remote, we usually mean remote launching. Often this
> > requires remote build since cross compilers may not be
> available for
> > the target. We rarely see cases where the source is not available
> > locally, although I am well aware of scenarios where this
> architecture
> > is required. We can certainly add a discussion on this topic.
> >
> > Doug Schaefer
> > Ottawa Lab, IBM Rational Software Division
> >
> >
> >
> > "Mary Huang" <mary.huang@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Sent by: cdt-dev-admin@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > 01/24/2005 02:03 PM
> > Please respond to
> > cdt-dev
> >
> >
> > To
> > <cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > cc
> >
> > Subject
> > Re: [cdt-dev] FW: CDT/embedded sessions at EclipseCon
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > I don't suppose that "Remote Development" includes the
> scenario where
> > the Eclipse IDE (with CDT) is local to the workstation, but
> the source
> > and the build environment is "remote" (i.e. on a totally different
> > system)?
> >
> > Mary
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Recoskie, Chris" <crecoskie@xxxxxx>
> > To: <cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Sent: Monday, January 24, 2005 12:28 PM
> > Subject: RE: [cdt-dev] FW: CDT/embedded sessions at EclipseCon
> >
> >
> >> Personally I think that for anyone not directly involved with this
> >> conversation there could be confusion as to what "remote" means.
> >> People
> >> might think that we're talking about running Eclipse/CDT with the
> >> debugger process itself or maybe even controlling the IDE
> running on
> >> another machine. When you say "embedded"
> development/debug everyone
> >> generally knows what you're talking about.
> >>
> >> A large part of the focus of the session is also not just
> on setting
> >> up a remote connection to the target but to the various
> requirements
> >> of debugging an embedded system in general, without even thinking
> >> about how one goes about connecting to the target. There is
> >> definitely an intersection between the two topics because embedded
> >> systems are usually remote systems (it's not too often that you're
> >> running your IDE on your remote system but hey, it could
> happen), but
> >> they are not the same.
> >>
> >> So, I don't mind changing the name if we come up with something
> >> suitable, but I don't think "CDT Remote Development and
> Debugging" is
> >> the solution as that loses a lot in translation.
> >>
> >> If we want to get together beforehand in a meeting I'm all
> for it if
> >> people want to. To be clear however, our idea though was to
> >> basically present our material and discuss it at the BOF and give
> >> others the chance to do the same with their own material. We were
> >> not planning to get together and come up with one big
> unified set of
> >> content to then present jointly at the BOF.
> >>
> >> Our thought regarding the theme was "What are the issues
> participants
> >> are having with using CDT for embedded development, and
> what could we
> >> start doing to improve things." We can add additional themes if
> >> people wish but that's the theme that we plan on addressing in our
> >> presentation and discussion.
> >>
> >> ___________________________________________
> >>
> >> Chris Recoskie
> >> Software Designer
> >> IDE Frameworks Group
> >> Texas Instruments, Toronto
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>> -----Original Message-----
> >>> From: cdt-dev-admin@xxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:cdt-dev-admin@xxxxxxxxxxx]
> >>> On Behalf Of Sebastien Marineau
> >>> Sent: Monday, January 24, 2005 11:42 AM
> >>> To: cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> >>> Subject: RE: [cdt-dev] FW: CDT/embedded sessions at EclipseCon
> >>>
> >>> Hi Sumit,
> >>>
> >>> Your suggestions are fine by me. TI, Montavista, others -- any
> >> comments?
> >>>
> >>> As for setting up a call -- I can do that. I'm assuming we want to
> >> have
> >>> the
> >>> others participate as well, so what time would work best for
> >>> everyone?
> >>>
> >>> Thanks,
> >>>
> >>> Sebastien
> >>>
> >>>> -----Original Message-----
> >>>> From: cdt-dev-admin@xxxxxxxxxxx
> >>>> [mailto:cdt-dev-admin@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Sumit Sarkar
> >>>> Sent: Friday, January 21, 2005 5:42 PM
> >>>> To: cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> >>>> Subject: Re: [cdt-dev] FW: CDT/embedded sessions at EclipseCon
> >>>>
> >>>> Hi Sebastien,
> >>>>
> >>>> Instead of "Embedded Development and Debugging", we
> like to call
> >>>> it "CDT Remote Development and Debugging" - the 1st
> March BOF. Can
> >>>> we come up with a "BOF theme" - so that the participants get a
> >>>> "platform"
> >>>> to discuss about? Like what are the challenges a developer face
> >>>> when they try to develop on a Remote machine and then
> what are the
> >>>> solutions are being currently worked on.
> >>>>
> >>>> Can we setup a meeting (may be next week) to discuss further on
> >>>> this BOF?
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks,
> >>>> sumit
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 15:05:14 -0500, Sebastien Marineau
> >>>> <sebastien@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>>>> Good catch -- that is indeed Tuesday the 28th :-)
> >>>>>
> >>>>> So here's where we are at for the BOFs:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Eclipse CDT BOF
> >>>>> Intel (20 min) - Leo Treggiari - Managed Build System
> >>>> overview Altera
> >>>>> (10-20 mins?) - Tracy Miranda - What Altera has been doing,
> >>>>> discussion on CDT features IBM (20 mins) - John Camelon -
> >>>> the latest
> >>>>> in cool parsing, and demo of the DOM viewer IBM (20
> mins) - Doug -
> >>>>> Demo of IBM C++/UML visualizer (built on CDT) QNX (15
> mins) - Dave
> >>>>> Inglis - Debug discussion
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Embedded development and debugging TI (20 mins) --
> Chris Recoskie
> >>>>> - demo, remote debugging issues Montavista (20 mins) -
> >>>>> Pierre-Alexandre Masse - current status on remote
> debug, ideas for
> >>>>> the future HP -- Sumit Sarkar - Remote development?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> In terms of other participation, how about WindRiver,
> >>>> Timesys, Redhat,
> >>>>> Rockwell, others?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Thanks,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Sebastien
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> -----Original Message-----
> >>>>>> From: cdt-dev-admin@xxxxxxxxxxx
> >>>>>> [mailto:cdt-dev-admin@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
> Pierre-Alexandre
> >>>>>> Masse
> >>>>>> Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2005 3:44 PM
> >>>>>> To: cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> >>>>>> Subject: Re: [cdt-dev] FW: CDT/embedded sessions at EclipseCon
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Do you mean it will be a week without Tuesday then?
> >>>>>> Just kidding ;)
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Pierre-Alexandre
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Recoskie, Chris wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> 2005 isn't a leap year so doing a BOF on the 29^th may
> >>>>>> prove difficult
> >>>>>>> without a flux capacitor
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> ___________________________________________
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Chris Recoskie
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Software Designer
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> IDE Frameworks Group
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Texas Instruments, Toronto
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
> >>>>>>> *From:* cdt-dev-admin@xxxxxxxxxxx
> >>>>>>> [mailto:cdt-dev-admin@xxxxxxxxxxx]
> >>>>>>> *On Behalf Of *Sebastien Marineau
> >>>>>>> *Sent:* Wednesday, January 19, 2005 5:14 PM
> >>>>>>> *To:* cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> >>>>>>> *Subject:* [cdt-dev] FW: CDT/embedded sessions at EclipseCon
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Hi folks,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Concerning the BOFs, I did get information back from the
> >>>>>>> EclipseCon organizers -- please see the email from
> >>>> Bjorn further
> >>>>>>> below. The bottom line is that we have the freedom to
> >>>> organize our
> >>>>>>> own
> >>>>>> BOFs, as
> >>>>>>> well as set the schedule.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> To get the ball rolling, our original proposal was to hold
> >>>>>> 2 BOFs, as
> >>>>>>> listed below.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Eclipse CDT BOF:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Meet the experts and discuss the implementation and
> >>>>>> direction of CDT.
> >>>>>>> The format will likely be a series of mini-overviews on
> >>>> different
> >>>>>>> aspects of CDT along with open discussions.Intel, IBM, QNX
> >>>>>> and Redhat
> >>>>>>> have volunteered to present here. We will also try to get a
> >> few
> >>>>>>> customers to present their experiences.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Remote development and debugging BOF:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> TI, HP, Montavista and IBM have expressed strong interest
> >>>>>> in hosting
> >>>>>>> this. The main focus would be on the specific
> >>>> challenges of using
> >>>>>>> Eclipse and CDT in a host/target configuration, both for
> >>>>>> development
> >>>>>>> and debugging. This spans the range from deeply
> >>>> embedded (TI) to
> >>>>>>> traditional embedded (Mvista) to the server/mini types of
> >>>>>> apps (HP and
> >>>>>>> IBM). I also expect we can get a couple of customers to
> >>>>>> participate in
> >>>>>>> this as well.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> My suggestion is to schedule these for the Tuesday and
> >>>>>> Wednesday - the
> >>>>>>> general CDT BOF on Tuesday the 29th, and the remote
> >>>>>>> development/debugging BOF on Wednesday (March 1st).
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> As for the content, I do know that additional companies (e.g.
> >>>>>>> Windriver) have expressed interest in participating, so
> >>>>>> maybe we can
> >>>>>>> start by having everyone throw out what they'd like to
> >>>> contribute
> >>>>>>> (discussion topics, mini-presentations, demos etc) and
> >>>>>> we'll collect
> >>>>>>> it into the BOF "program".
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Cheers,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Sebastien
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>> -
> >>>>>> --
> >>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> *From:* Bjorn Freeman-Benson [mailto:bjorn@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
> >>>>>>> *Sent:* Wednesday, January 19, 2005 4:21 PM
> >>>>>>> *To:* 'Dwight Deugo'; sebastien@xxxxxxx
> >>>>>>> *Subject:* RE: CDT/embedded sessions at EclipseCon
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Sebastien,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Please forward this clarification to the CDT mailing
> >>>>>> list - thank you.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I, as the EclipseCon Organizing Chair / Final
> >>>> Arbitrar of All
> >>>>>>> Things EclipseCon, received a forwarded copy of
> >>>> this CDT mailing
> >>>>>>> list and I'd like to take the opportunity to set the
> >> record
> >>>>>>> straight / clarify the situation...
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Hello All,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> While working out some issues with my registration
> >>>>>> I just got
> >>>>>>> word from Meeting Strategies Worldwide (they're
> >>>> doing the
> >>>>>>> registration etc for EclipseCon) that the
> >>>> decision on which
> >>>>>>> BOFs to go with will be made onsite. Yes, you read
> >>>>>> that right
> >>>>>>> - onsite on the day of.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> This means that if we want to do a BOF we will have
> >>>>>> to submit
> >>>>>>> our proposals yet again.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Relevant text quoted:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> **_I have just received word today that all BoF
> >>>> submissions
> >>>>>>> have been neither accepted nor rejected - all BoFs
> >>>>>> will now be
> >>>>>>> decided upon onsite at the conference. An email
> >>>> will be sent
> >>>>>>> very soon, to all people who have submitted BoFs
> >>>>>> detailing the
> >>>>>>> process for getting their BoF submitted onsite._**
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> It might be worthwhile to not rely on the EclipseCon
> >>>>>>> organizers for this and organize a BOF ourselves -
> >>>>>> does anyone
> >>>>>>> from the Bay area got some meeting space they
> >>>> could donate?
> >>>>>>> ;^)
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> We (and by this I mean the Singular We, i.e., me) decided
> >> to
> >>>>>>> organize the BOFs at EclipseCon 2005 exactly the
> >>>> same way they
> >>>>>>> were run at EclipseCon 2004. We made this choice
> >>>> because it is
> >>>>>>> organizationally much simpler. Here's how it worked
> >>>>>> last year and
> >>>>>>> here's how it's going to work this year:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> * One goal for BOFs is to facilitate the informal
> >>>>>> gathering of
> >>>>>>> similarly interested attendees.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> * Another goal for BOFs is to make the process
> >>>> of gathering
> >>>>>>> for a BOF as simple as possible for everyone
> >> involved.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> * Another goal is to make best use of the
> >>>> meeting space we
> >>>>>>> have available. Thus we want to provide the
> >>>>>> larger rooms to
> >>>>>>> the BOFs with more people and the smaller
> >>>> rooms to those
> >>>>>>> with fewer people.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> * An explicit negative goal for BOFs is to prevent
> >>>>>> their being
> >>>>>>> hijacked by companies using them as
> >>>> advertising pitches.
> >>>>>>> Allowing BOFs to be pre-scheduled has, at other
> >>>>>> conferences,
> >>>>>>> allowed them to be taken over by marketing types.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> So, here's the process - it's very simple and I think
> >>>>>> you'll find
> >>>>>>> that it easily meets your needs as well our overall goals:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> 1. At EclipseCon there is a bulletin board. Beside
> >>>>>> the bulletin
> >>>>>>> board are blank sign-up sheets.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> 2. You arrive at the conference, you go to the
> >>>>>> bulletin board,
> >>>>>>> you take a sign-up sheet and write "CDT" in
> >>>> the title box.
> >>>>>>> You thumb tack it on the bulletin board.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> 3. During the day, interested people sign up on
> >>>> the sheets on
> >>>>>>> the board for the BOFs they are interested in.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> 4. At 5pm, the organizers (that's me or one of the
> >> other
> >>>>>>> volunteers) looks at the attendance of each
> >>>> of the BOFs on
> >>>>>>> the board and assigns them to rooms by writing, in
> >> big
> >>>>>>> letters, the room name (e.g., Seaside B) on the
> >> page.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> 5. After enjoying the free food at the reception
> >>>>>> that evening,
> >>>>>>> people wander by the bulletin board to learn
> >>>> which room
> >>>>>>> their BOF is assigned to.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> This process meets the goals:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> * People can decided to meet in a BOF in
> >>>> advance or at the
> >>>>>>> last minute. If you want to schedule it in
> >>>> advance, simple
> >>>>>>> agree amongst all your colleagues that you are
> >>>>>> going to have
> >>>>>>> a BOF on, say, Tuesday night. Put up a sign-up
> >> sheet,
> >>>>>>> sign-up, and get assigned a room. The BOF I'm
> >>>> involved in
> >>>>>>> (Language Toolkits and Universal IDEs) is doing
> >>>>>> exactly that
> >>>>>>> - see the announcement that Chris Laffra posted to
> >> the
> >>>>>>> eclipse.eclipsecon newsgroup.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> * Simple physical sheets of paper are easy. Without
> >>>>>> having to
> >>>>>>> write any complex programs, they allow us to
> >>>>>> easily allocate
> >>>>>>> rooms by size and they are easy for the people
> >>>>>> attending the
> >>>>>>> conference to sign up on and to read.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> * Allocating rooms at 5pm the day-of allows us
> >>>> to make the
> >>>>>>> best use of space. There are plenty of rooms,
> >>>> but some of
> >>>>>>> them are very small and I'd hate to have to
> >>>> pre-guess the
> >>>>>>> size of each BOF. I know I don't know whether CDT
> >>>>>> or WTP is
> >>>>>>> going to draw a larger crowd. This way we will know.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> * Not pre-scheduling BOFs prevents vendors from
> >>>>>> using them as
> >>>>>>> advertising rooms because they can't say "come by
> >>>>>> room X at
> >>>>>>> time Y to hear us talk about product Z". It
> >>>> allows you and
> >>>>>>> your colleagues to do so, because you are
> >> collectively
> >>>>>>> agreeing to meet, but it prevents sales
> >>>> pitches because in
> >>>>>>> those cases there is no collective agreement - it's
> >> a
> >>>>>>> one-way communication.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> So, by all means, please schedule a CDT BOF. I look
> >>>> forward to
> >>>>>>> your having a really great time at the conference, and
> >>>>>> I apologize
> >>>>>>> if this mechanism was not explained to you before.
> >>>> Mea culpa...
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Regards,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Bjorn Freeman-Benson
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> EclipseCon Organizing Chair
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>>> cdt-dev mailing list
> >>>>>> cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> >>>>>> http://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev
> >>>>>>
> >>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>> cdt-dev mailing list
> >>>>> cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> >>>>> http://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev
> >>>>>
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> cdt-dev mailing list
> >>>> cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> >>>> http://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev
> >>>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> cdt-dev mailing list
> >>> cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> >>> http://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> cdt-dev mailing list
> >> cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> >> http://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > cdt-dev mailing list
> > cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > http://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > cdt-dev mailing list
> > cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > http://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> cdt-dev mailing list
> cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> http://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev
>
