Re: [cdt-dev] CMake plugins

[Doug Schaefer <dschaefer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On
> Behalf Of Martin Weber
> Sent: Saturday, November 18, 2017 4:53 PM
> To: CDT General developers list. <cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: [cdt-dev] CMake plugins
> 
> Am Donnerstag, 9. November 2017, 20:36:03 CET schrieb Doug Schaefer:
> > Well, the good news is that all we have today in the CDT is the Core
> > Build integration and project templates. Plenty of room to expand and
> > grow that in other areas, especially the editor. I look forward to all
> > of your contributions and help.
> 
> Good news!
> All original copyright holders of CmakeEd approved to change the license to EPL.
> I will mail the approvals PM, if requested.

That's awesome. Thank you for getting that together. I think that action of changing the copyright notices would be sufficient evidence of the agreement.
 
> If eclipse.org is interested, how should we proceed?
> If the license info in CmakeEd code will had been changed to EPL, would
> eclipse.org provide
> - code hosting,
> - an issue tracker and
> - CI build infrastructure?

Yes, eclipse has all those things.

> Or would it be sufficient to eclipse.org to just have a reference in their EPP
> composite update site that points to CmakeEd`s update site?

No, EPP packages can only refer to sites hosted on Eclipse infrastructure.

> NOTE: CmakeEd roughly follows the releases cycles of cmake as they evolve
> their language, which is about every 3-4 weeks currently. EPP cycles are much
> longer.

Does the language actually change every 3-4 weeks? Are these minor releases or maintenance releases. Projects can release maintenance releases at anytime. And they can actually release minor releases any time as well. EPP is just a packaging convenience.

> I would prefer to NOT have CmakeEd under the CDT umbrella, my concerns are
> that
> - CmakeEd issues would get lost under the ~65k open issues under CDT and
> IMHO more important,

We can make CMake be its own component so it has a clean slate. And CDT doesn't have 65K open issues. It's only around 4k. And if we actually triage them, there would be way less.

> - cmake itself is not tied to just C/C++. According to [1], cmake can generate
> build scripts to compile at least eight source languages. I think it`s better to have
> CmakeEd below some kind of 'Eclipse Source Editors' umbrella.

That same argument could be made for most CDT features like build and debug. Only the editor and source navigation are C/C++ specific. And we have plans to bring target management into the fold.

We could make it a subproject of CDT. There are certain project management things that need to be done for Eclipse projects, release reviews, CQ's, etc. It's a non-trivial amount of work that we're already doing in CDT. It is well documented here: https://eclipse.org/projects/handbook if you haven't already seen it.

It's my belief that we need CMake support in the CDT and we have a good start on that with more contributions coming. We'd love to have your work be a huge addition to it and fill in the holes. We'd be happy to switch our plans to help you bring it in and contribute to it and make sure it's a great experience for all our users.

Let us know if you have more questions.
Thanks,
Doug.

> 
> MfG,
> 	Martin
> 
> [1] <https://stackoverflow.com/questions/24534384/what-are-the-possible-
> values-for-the-language-variable-in-cmake>
> 
> >
> > Doug.
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > > [mailto:cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Martin Weber
> > > Sent: Thursday, November 9, 2017 3:22 PM
> > > To: cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > > Subject: Re: [cdt-dev] CMake plugins
> > >
> > > Am Donnerstag, 9. November 2017, 20:00:45 CET schrieb Doug Schaefer:
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > > [mailto:cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Martin Weber
> > > > > Sent: Thursday, November 9, 2017 2:53 PM
> > > > > To: cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > > Subject: Re: [cdt-dev] CMake plugins
> > >
> > > ...
> > >
> > > > > Or better, search for cmake in the eclipse marketplace to find
> > > > > what`s already there.
> > > >
> > > > It mainly comes down to licensing. These plug-ins are not EPL.
> > > > They also do not use the new Core Build system that we are migrating to.
> > > > I'd love to have the editor but the copyright holders would need
> > > > to change the>
> > > license.
> > >
> > > cmake4eclipse is EPL licensed.
> > >
> > > CMakeEd is CPL, which should be EPL compatible [1]. Since I am the
> > > current maintainer, I could ask the original authors to change the
> > > license, if you like.>
> > > > Which raises the point, I also could ask why the authors of those
> > > > plug-ins didn't contribute them directly to CDT.
> > >
> > > Regarding cmake4eclipse, I am the author and already announced here
> > > I would donate it to CDT.
> > >
> > > /Martin
> > >
> > > [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Public_License
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Cd wrttn wtht vwls s mch trsr.
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > cdt-dev mailing list
> > > cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > > To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or
> > > unsubscribe from this list, visit
> > > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > cdt-dev mailing list
> > cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or
> > unsubscribe from this list, visit
> > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev
> 
> 
> --
> Cd wrttn wtht vwls s mch trsr.
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> cdt-dev mailing list
> cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from
> this list, visit
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev