RE: [eclipse-pmc] Documenting dependencies on operating systems andJRE's

[John Arthorne <John_Arthorne@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Yes, I have had contact with the EMO
and they advised me to enter the CQ's. I don't just invent work for myself
;)

I also don't see much point in documenting
the obvious and don't see the particular risk, but it seemed easier to
just enter a blanket CQ with this list than to debate it with them further.
 We do have CQ's for specific windowing and browser libraries we invoke
such as GTK, Mozilla, etc, but we don't currently document our references
to the core operating system itself. Since it appears to be acceptable,
I prefer just saying a general dependency like "Windows XP" rather
than further listing specific OS libraries we invoke. I made the suggestion
that they publish a list of "pre-approved" exempt pre-requisites
for the most obvious things (operating systems, JREs), so that projects
don't have this additional hoop to jump through. 

I gathered the list below from looking
at our most recent integration build. I'm not attempting to capture historical
information, but just what we intend to reference in the Helios release.

John

"Oberhuber, Martin" <Martin.Oberhuber@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent by: eclipse-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx

01/20/2010 04:07 PM

Please respond to
eclipse-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx

To	<eclipse-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx>
cc
Subject	RE: [eclipse-pmc] Documenting dependencies on operating systems        andJRE's

Hi John,
 
have you had contact with the
EMO already regarding this "documenting exempt pre-reqs"
process? As per the policy you
cited, the policy is only meant as a "framework for interpretation".
 
So before we go into great lengths
entering CQ's which are hard to keep exact, let's ensure we
know what is really needed. I
personally do not see much value in documenting the obvious.
 
For instance, in terms of the
Linux kernel, do we already document pre-reqs like X Window,
GTK+, ... or, what was the last
version of Eclipse that was actually known to run on QNX?
Where should we start and where
should we end? 
 
In my understanding, the policy
was made to ensure that commercial adopters of Eclipse
technology are not forced into
downloading / bundling dubious additional software that is
nowhere documented. In terms of
the OS and core UI libs, I do not see such a risk.
 
Martin

---

From: eclipse-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:eclipse-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of John Arthorne
Sent: Wednesday, January 20, 2010 9:38 PM
To: eclipse-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [eclipse-pmc] Documenting dependencies on operating systems
andJRE's


It has come to my attention that we must enter CQ's for all dependencies
on third party software that we reference, including operating systems
and JRE's [1]. I had previously thought that exempt pre-reqs didn't require
a CQ. Furthermore, the policy says: 

"These discussions and decisions must occur transparently either via
email on the public PMC mailing list, or in the minutes of meetings distributed
to the public PMC mailing list." 

I am writing this email to satisfy the above requirement. I would like
to declare an "exempt pre-req" dependency for the Eclipse project
on the following: 

Windows (CE, XP, Vista, or 7) 
Linux Kernel 2.6 
Mac OS X 10.5 or greater 
Sun Solaris 10 or greater 
HPUX 11i v2 or greater 
IBM AIX 5.3 or greater 
QNX Photon 
Java Runtime Environment 1.4.2 or greater 

Since the CQ deadline for Helios is Feb. 5th, I'd like to submit a CQ for
these as soon as possible. Please respond here with any comments, concerns,
additions, or corrections. If I hear no objections or corrections before
February 1st, I will assume all is well and I will enter the CQ.

John 

[1] http://www.eclipse.org/org/documents/Eclipse_Policy_and_Procedure_for_3rd_Party_Dependencies_Final.pdf_______________________________________________
eclipse-pmc mailing list
eclipse-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse-pmc