It
is too easy for projects to make too many assumptions about
the audience that is using the simrel repository. Note that
I am not talking about the audience for a particular EPP
package. For instance, based on current repository
composition, plugin developers do use the simrel repository,
but they like to code against JDT (for instance) and not WTP
(for instance). This type of inconsistency really reduces
the value of the simrel repository as it forces developers
to go hunting for pieces they need elsewhere and hope that
they get the right version to match pieces they got from
simrel repo. It also limits the type of EPP packages that
can be created, since EPP packages can only draw from the
simrel repo.
Thanks,
-
Konstantin
We
did not discuss it to that level (pros and cons of including
source) ... just that it is good to leave as much as
possible up to the independent projects to decide for
themselves.
"Common
repository" is a misnomer and I should be more careful not
to call it that. It has never been the intent to provide one
repository with everything ... the intent is simply to
provide a repository for the Simultaneous Release: and its
purpose is to make it easier for users to find and get what
they need for what ever task or role that are focused on ...
and the planning council thinks it is best to leave decision
or analysis up to the project and their community and
adopters.
To
give one example, that I just happen to know you are
interested in :) ... I think WTP decided many years ago not
to include source since the primary audience, web
developers, did not need the source, and having it there a)
made it more complicated for the casual end-user web
developer to decide what to get (they likely don't know if
they need source or not) and b) if source was provided
(either automatically, or by user selection) it nearly
doubles the download sizes [just going by my old, possibly
inaccurate memories] so it was decided not to put source
there in Sim. Rel. repo.
I'm
just trying to recount history .. and admit it is confusing
to call the repo by so many names ... not arguing pro or con
to include source or not ... the important point being that
we (Planning Council) want each project to be able to decide
as much as possible what to contribute . And with that, I
will bow out of this discussion as it is up to the project.
Thanks
From:
"Konstantin
Komissarchik" <konstantin.komissarchik@xxxxxxxxxx>
To:
"'Cross
project issues'" <cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>,
Date:
08/08/2013
11:11 AM
Subject:
Re:
[cross-project-issues-dev] Source code in simrel aggregate
repo
Sent
by: cross-project-issues-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
Thanks
for the summary. I would be curious to know what the
arguments against contributing source were… It seems to me
that the status quo has led to inconsistency, an antithesis
to the point of having a common repository.
-
Konstantin
From:
cross-project-issues-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:cross-project-issues-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of David M Williams
Sent: Wednesday, August 07, 2013 11:39 PM
To: Cross project issues
Subject: Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Source code in
simrel aggregate repo
Since
I promised ... just to close the loop on this (my part of
the loop, anyway), the Planning Council decided the "status
quo" was adequate as far as Planning Council was concerned
... that is, we won't say one way or the other and will
continue to let each project decide exactly what to
contribute to common repository ... based, as usual, on
their interaction, requests, and feedback, with their
community and adopters, and their other priorities.
Good luck and thanks,
From: "Konstantin
Komissarchik" <konstantin.komissarchik@xxxxxxxxxx>
To: "'Cross
project issues'" <cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>,
Date: 08/01/2013 05:04 PM
Subject: Re:
[cross-project-issues-dev] Source code in simrel aggregate
repo
Sent by: cross-project-issues-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
Thanks, David. When thinking about plugin developers, I find
it is useful to further divide that group into those working
on eclipse.org projects and the rest. Those working on
eclipse.org projects, especially those also participating in
the simultaneous release, need to track integration builds
of their dependencies, know where those come from, etc. The
rest could certainly benefit from being able to get
everything they need (including source) from the
simultaneous release repo.
I will start opening bugs for projects that don’t contribute
source as I need it for the Ultimate Edition. Let me know if
the Planning Council needs further input from me on this
topic.
Thanks,
- Konstantin
From:
cross-project-issues-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:cross-project-issues-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of David M Williams
Sent: Thursday, August 01, 2013 1:42 PM
To: Cross project issues
Subject: Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Source code in
simrel aggregate repo
I'll add to Planning Council Agenda, but you might "work you
point of view" through your Planning Council rep ... with a
specific proposal. I'm not sure "EPP" vs. "Common Repo"
changes that much (just in my opinion) since the common repo
has been seen as primarily for "end users" (granted, some
end users are "developers of plugins") so it'd be nice to
have concise clear statement of what projects "should do",
in general. But, yes, you (anyone) can always ask specific
projects to do it differently ... we have no prohibition
against it. I know for WTP, many years ago, it was decided
not to include source, simply because it was felt developers
"knew how to get the source" from WTP's project and no
reason to burden everyone else with it. [And, believe me,
the Planning Council has discussed many times and could
never even come up with a good definition of "SDK" :) ...
well, you know, one that applied to all Eclipse projects.].
This history is one of the reasons we (me especially)
recommend people do not "build against" the common repo ...
but, instead build against each individual project they want
... but I know that advise usually goes unheeded (but was
happy when I once saw you give the same advice :)
Thanks for your efforts,
From: "Konstantin
Komissarchik" <konstantin.komissarchik@xxxxxxxxxx>
To: "'Cross
project issues'" <cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>,
Date: 08/01/2013 02:18 PM
Subject: Re:
[cross-project-issues-dev] Source code in simrel aggregate
repo
Sent by: cross-project-issues-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
I suspect that what has happened in at least some of the
cases is that the requirements of the corresponding EPP
package drove what was contributed to the simrel repository.
A natural effect, but not ideal, since the user base for the
simrel repo is more diverse in their requirements.
Should this continue to be at project’s discretion or should
contributing source to simrel repo be a requirement? I doubt
that projects would object to contributing source if asked,
but maybe it would be better spelled out up front.
- Konstantin
From:
cross-project-issues-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:cross-project-issues-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of David M Williams
Sent: Thursday, August 01, 2013 10:50 AM
To: Cross project issues
Subject: Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Source code in
simrel aggregate repo
This has always been viewed to be the contributing project's
decision. (Which ... is true in general ... some projects do
not contribute ALL their features to common repo; such as
perhaps not examples, perhaps not some of the rarer
functions, etc.). I know for WTP, it was thought best to
minimize download (so no source ... last I knew), since it
was intended for people developing web apps ... not for
people developing plugins for WTP.
Hope that answers what you were asking.
From: "Konstantin
Komissarchik" <konstantin.komissarchik@xxxxxxxxxx>
To: "'Cross
project issues'" <cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>,
Date: 08/01/2013 12:58 PM
Subject: [cross-project-issues-dev]
Source code in simrel aggregate repo
Sent by: cross-project-issues-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
As part of working on the definition for Eclipse Ultimate
Edition, I have discovered that a number of prominent
projects do not contribute source to the simrel repo. Before
I start opening bugs, is there prior context or discussion
on whether or not source code should be in the simrel repo?
Note that I am not asking whether source code should be in a
particular package as that’s dependent on the user that the
package is targeting.
Thanks,
- Konstantin_______________________________________________
cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev_______________________________________________
cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev_______________________________________________
cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev_______________________________________________
cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev