Re: [dash-dev] Branding the new "Common Builder" Dash component

["Nick Boldt" <codeslave@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Thomas:

If you mean /cvsroot/technology/o.e.dash/o.e.dash.commonbuilder, see
http://wiki.eclipse.org/Build_Workshop_2:_Build_Harder and
http://wiki.eclipse.org/Build_Workshop_2:_Build_Harder/Report ... more
info coming soon.

There's been some interest in using Buckminster as a replacement for
my .releng project method of build input specification (but we'll need
your help there, as I know next to nothing about Buckminster config
files and how they're used to fire up PDE Build and to run headless
JUnit tests). I'm open to working with anyone who has a
better/different approach, provided they're willing to commit cycles
to the creation effort and its subsequent maintenance. (Having better
integration w/ Maven or SVN, for example, would be awesome, but as I'm
not on any projects who are asking for this, it's hard to prioritize
it until people start asking for it.)

If you mean Michael's GSOC project,
http://wiki.eclipse.org/JET_Transforms/Wizards_for_creating_project_meta_data
... midterm evals are next week so there should be updated
documentation and a pointer to CVS soon. (Michael: hint, hint!)
Meanwhile, you can look in /cvsroot/technology/org.eclipse.soc/athena
for the code.

Nick

On Sun, Jun 29, 2008 at 2:59 PM, Thomas Hallgren <thomas@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi Nick,
> Where can I find more information about this new component? It sounds
> interesting.
>
> Regards,
> Thomas Hallgren
>
> Nick Boldt wrote:
>>
>> Bjorn et al.,
>>
>> I was thinking more about the branding of this new component, and since
>> I've been having a similar conversation with my GSoC student, Michael Robb,
>> about his work to create wizards for generating project meta (eg., examples
>> feature/plugin stub, tests feature/plugin stub, SDK feature stub, and
>> .releng project) [1], it seems like his work ought to live in Dash too,
>> rather than in o.e.soc as this is entirely complementary to the work
>> involved in a common builder.
>>
>> We had discussed calling his component Athena [2] in reference to her
>> creation story (and the idea of projects "springing forth, fully formed"),
>> but hadn't fully decided on "athena" vs. "metagen".
>>
>> I like the name and its evocative branding, so I'd like to put it to the
>> larger Dash committer community.
>>
>> Should "metagen", currently a GSoC project [1], and the new
>> "commonbuilder" be united under the org.eclipse.dash.athena or
>> org.eclipse.athena namespace?
>>
>> (Michael, this would mean moving your code from the SOC cvs repo to Dash
>> one, and using o.e.(dash.)athena.metagen.* for your code. We'd also have to
>> vote you in as a committer, but that's trivial.)
>>
>> [1]
>> http://wiki.eclipse.org/JET_Transforms/Wizards_for_creating_project_meta_data
>> [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athena#The_Olympian_version
>>
>> Thoughts?
>>
>> Nick
>>
>> On Fri, Jun 27, 2008 at 12:05 PM, portal on behalf of Bjorn Freeman-Benson
>> <bjorn.freeman-benson@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:bjorn.freeman-benson@xxxxxxxxxxx>>
>> wrote:
>> > technology.dash.commonbuild Committers,