Re: [dsdp-tm-dev] Vote Summary: API changes on RSE?

[David McKnight <dmcknigh@xxxxxxxxxx>]

okay, done

____________________________________
David McKnight    
Phone:   905-413-3902 , T/L:  969-3902
Internet: dmcknigh@xxxxxxxxxx
Mail:       D1/140/8200/TOR
____________________________________

Martin Oberhuber <martin.oberhuber@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>

20/10/2006 05:23 PM

To	David McKnight/Toronto/IBM@IBMCA
cc	Target Management developer discussions <dsdp-tm-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject	Re: [dsdp-tm-dev] Vote Summary: API changes on RSE?

Thanks Dave.

If you can, I'd appreciate if you could document all the API changes made
in
/org.eclipse.rse.build/template/buildNotes.php

if you don't feel comfortable with that, you can also drop me a short 
note when you are done, and I'll update the build notes.

Thanks
martin

David McKnight schrieb:

>
> I'll make the changes to the list* APIs now since they are needed
no 
> matter what.  The other APIs still require a look before I make
any 
> decisions on them.
>
> ____________________________________
> David McKnight    
> Phone:   905-413-3902 , T/L:  969-3902
> Internet: dmcknigh@xxxxxxxxxx
> Mail:       D1/140/8200/TOR
> ____________________________________
>
>
>
> *Martin Oberhuber <martin.oberhuber@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>*
> Sent by: dsdp-tm-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
>
> 20/10/2006 03:56 PM
> Please respond to
> Target Management developer discussions <dsdp-tm-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>
>
>                  
> To
>                  Target
Management developer discussions <dsdp-tm-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> cc
>                  
> Subject
>                  [dsdp-tm-dev]
Vote Summary: API changes on RSE?
>
>
>
>                  
>
>
>
>
>
> Dear committers,
>
> from our 8 committers, we've got 7 votes +1,
> Michael Scharf did not vote yet.
>
> I think that's sufficient for DaveM to go forward making this change,
> and it also encourages us to allow final API fixes until the latest
> possible time.
> Michael - you'll still have the chance to give a final veto within
one
> week if you are against this. Please do cast your vote even though
we
> are going forward already.
>
> Given Lother's comment as a user, I'd suggest trying to get the API
> right this time even if it's a little bit more effort - so I'd rather
> not do this in a 2-step approach unless the effort is too high.
> Mimimizing risk is still more important right now than polishing too
> much. So Dave, please use good judgement in how much you want to invest.
> Thanks for tackling this.
>
> Cheers
> Martin
>
> Martin Oberhuber schrieb:
>
> > Dear committers,
> >
> > Dave McKnight has proposed an API change to the IRemoteFileSubSystem
> > and IRemoteProcessSubSystem in order to add progress monitors
to some
> > method calls, such that there is a chance to cancel long running
> > operations.
> >
> > My personal take is, that although its already very late in the
game
> > I'd like to accept such API changes because it appears that
> > 1. We dont have many clients on openRSE yet. At least none that
I'd
> > know of.
> > 2. Those API changes appear simple and straightforward.
> > 3. API changes will become much more difficult than now as soon
as we
> > have 1.0 released, so better do it now than in the future.
> > 4. The API changes will enable our users to write interruptable
> > services, i.e. allow something not possible today. So even if
our own
> > services are not all interruptable yet, it's important to open
up the
> > API for allowing interruptable services in the future.
> >
> > Considering all this, I'm voting +1.
> > Committers please cast your votes.
> >
> > Thanks
> > Martin
> >
> > David McKnight schrieb:
> >
> >> 1) I did consider putting this to a vote but then thought
it was too
> >> trivial a change for that.   It was really something
that should have
> >> been done from the start but it was an oversight.  At
this point I
> >> haven't committed anything since I wanted to see the reaction
to my
> >> email and I guess that was a good thing.
> >>
> >> 2) I was wondering about the order of arguments too - I suppose
the
> >> last argument is consistent with RSE, although, I'm not sure
how
> >> consistent it is with other things.  I guess the natural
thing would
> >> be to place it at the end.  I would like to make the
corresponding
> >> changes to the list*() APIs for IRemoteProcessSubSystem as
well.  I'm
> >> still not sure whether we should have monitors for all the
methods
> >> right now without taking a closer look at their usages.  
I'm
> >> wondering if maybe we ought to phase this in two parts: first
to deal
> >> with queries (the most obvious case) and second phase to
deal with
> >> the other subsystem calls.  Any thoughts on that?  
> >> Before getting into the details, I suppose we may as well
have a vote
> >> on whether or not we should make any API changes at this
point.
> >>
> >> ____________________________________
> >> David McKnight    Phone:   905-413-3902 ,
T/L:  969-3902
> >> Internet: dmcknigh@xxxxxxxxxx
> >> Mail:       D1/140/8200/TOR
> >
> >
>
>
> -- 
> Martin Oberhuber
> Wind River Systems, Inc.
> Target Management Project Lead, DSDP PMC Member
> http://www.eclipse.org/dsdp/tm
>
> _______________________________________________
> dsdp-tm-dev mailing list
> dsdp-tm-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/dsdp-tm-dev
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>_______________________________________________
>dsdp-tm-dev mailing list
>dsdp-tm-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
>https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/dsdp-tm-dev
>  
>


-- 
Martin Oberhuber
Wind River Systems, Inc.
Target Management Project Lead, DSDP PMC Member
http://www.eclipse.org/dsdp/tm