Re: [epp-dev] EPP packages containing Incubating projects (IMPORTANT)

[Markus Knauer <mknauer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Friday 13 June 2008, Richard Gronback wrote:
> Markus, I guess this means if I change the product.name to
> eclipse-modeling-ganymede-RC4-incubation that the archives will be named
> properly.  

Yes, magically they changed their names.
[But I have to adjust my html-generation script in the next few days.]

> And, as we already have a listing of the included features here: 
> http://www.eclipse.org/downloads/packages/eclipse-modeling-tools/ganymederc
>3 , I could add a comment to our package description that features below
> version 1.0.0 are incubating (this blurb appears above the list, and on the
> main download page).

The updated package description will be available with the RC4 build, but as 
you can see, I've updated the RC3 page manually.


> And, maybe we could automate the inclusion of an incubation image on the
> page if the feature list contains any version < 1.0.0?


Nathan, any ideas here?


> This should be sufficient, right?

From my point of view: Yes. But maybe Janet and/or Bjorn can confirm?

Thanks and regards,
Markus


> Thanks,
> Rich
>
> On 6/13/08 1:39 PM, "Janet Campbell" <janet.campbell@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > I don't see any difficulty including the incubating components, but it is
> > important that the downstream consumer be made aware of what the package
> > comprises.  If a package includes incubating projects, then the rules
> > that apply to the incubating project must also be applied to the package
> > so that downstream consumers understand that there are incubating
> > projects in the package.  This would entail using a naming convention
> > that makes this clear as well as clearly stating what incubating projects
> > are included in the package on the relevant web page.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Janet
> >
> > Janet Campbell
> > Phone:  +1.613.224.9461, x.229 (GMT -5)
> > Fax:  +1.613.224.5172
> > janet.campbell@xxxxxxxxxxx
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Richard Gronback [mailto:richard.gronback@xxxxxxxxxxx]
> > Sent: Friday, June 13, 2008 1:05 PM
> > To: Eclipse Packaging Project
> > Cc: Janet Campbell; Ed Merks
> > Subject: Re: [epp-dev] EPP packages containing Incubating projects
> > (IMPORTANT)
> >
> > Well, I was hoping to hear from Legal on it and include them if at all
> > possible.  Janet, can you give us an indication of what complications are
> > involved with including incubating components in a package?
> >
> > I forgot to list UML2 Tools below, which is also in incubation.  Without
> > UML modeling, the Modeling package will be missing quite a bit of
> > expected functionality.
> >
> > Copying Ed, as he's also interested in seeing his incubating components
> > included.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Rich
> >
> > On 6/13/08 12:15 PM, "Markus Knauer" <mknauer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> Okay, that means that the Modeling package is the only one that
> >> contains projects in incubation phase. If you agree to remove them
> >> from the package, then this would be the easiest solution. Otherwise
> >> we have to discuss it with Eclipse Legal.
> >>
> >> Rich, what do you think?
> >>
> >> Markus
> >>
> >> On Friday 13 June 2008, Richard Gronback wrote:
> >>> Yes, there are some incubating projects/components in the Modeling
> >
> > package.
> >
> >>> I can remove them easily enough, if necessary.  In fact, I'd rather
> >>> not have the package labeled with 'incubation'.
> >>>
> >>> Below are those in incubation:
> >>>
> >>> - JET
> >>> - Ecore Tools
> >>> - Compare
> >>> - Search
> >>> - Mint
> >>>
> >>> The following are graduating with this release:
> >>>
> >>> - M2M QVTO
> >>> - CDO
> >>> - Teneo
> >>>
> >>> Best,
> >>> Rich
> >>>
> >>> On 6/13/08 4:45 AM, "Markus Knauer" <mknauer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>>> The long discussion about the naming and sort order of the packages
> >>>> on bug https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=224729 reminds
> >>>> me of an old issue: Including content from projects in incubation
> >>>> phase.
> >>>>
> >>>> When I wrote that email below (in February), it was based on the
> >>>> assumption that *all* bits included in the Ganymede packages are out
> >>>> of incubation, but as of today I am not sure any more.
> >>>>
> >>>> * Eclipse IDE for Java EE Developers
> >>>>   @ David: No projects in incubation? Correct?
> >>>>
> >>>> * Eclipse Classic - fake package (Eclipse SDK)
> >>>>
> >>>> * Eclipse for RCP/Plug-in Developers = OKAY
> >>>>
> >>>> * Eclipse Modeling Tools
> >>>>   @ Rich: I assume there are some projects still in incubation?
> >>>>
> >>>> * Eclipse IDE for Java Developers
> >>>>   @ Mik: No projects in incubation? Correct?
> >>>>
> >>>> * Eclipse IDE for C/C++ Developers
> >>>>   @ Doug: No projects in incubation? Correct? org.eclipse.cdt.mylyn?
> >>>>
> >>>> * Eclipse IDE for Java and Report Developers
> >>>>   @ Xiaoying: No projects in incubation? Correct?
> >>>>
> >>>> @Bjorn, Janet: *If* there are features from a project in incubation
> >>>> phase included in a package, what do we have to do? Change the file
> >>>> name of the package, include it in the description at the web site,
> >>>> ...
> >
> > what else?
> >
> >>>> Thanks,
> >>>> Markus
> >>>>
> >>>> On Wednesday 06 February 2008, Markus Knauer wrote:
> >>>>>> (1) Do any of the existing packages contain projects that are
> >>>>>> incubating or are shipping incubating code?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Please find a list of all currently included features at the end of
> >>>>> this email.
> >>>>> Status: IMHO there are no features from incubation projects in the
> >>>>> projects with one exception: The EPP UDC code is in incubation, but
> >>>>> only included in the Ganymede packages.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> (2) If so, when can you change the package build system to include
> >>>>>> the correct incubation phrase and to have the package name itself
> >>>>>> be "JavaEE (Incubation)" (or whatever).
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Europa Packages: They do not contain features from projects in
> >>>>> incubation phase. => No action required.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Ganymede Packages: These are 'milestone' or nightly builds. They
> >>>>> contain at least something like "-M4-" in their name. AFAIK we can
> >>>>> have as much milestone builds as we need, but we have to ensure
> >>>>> that everything inside is out of incubation until the release. =>
> >>>>> Do we need to change something until then?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Other/future packages: Projects in the packages *should* have a
> >>>>> version
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> =1.0 unless there are good reasons to include something newer. If
> >>>>>> this is
> >>>>>
> >>>>> the case we should start describing naming conventions.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Markus
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> %<
> >>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>> -----
> >>>>> -- "org.eclipse.cdt"
> >>>>> "org.eclipse.cvs"
> >>>>> "org.eclipse.datatools.connectivity.feature"
> >>>>> "org.eclipse.datatools.connectivity.oda.designer.feature"
> >>>>> "org.eclipse.datatools.connectivity.oda.feature"
> >>>>> "org.eclipse.datatools.doc.user"
> >>>>> "org.eclipse.datatools.enablement.apache.derby.feature"
> >>>>> "org.eclipse.datatools.enablement.feature"
> >>>>> "org.eclipse.datatools.enablement.hsqldb.feature"
> >>>>> "org.eclipse.datatools.enablement.ibm.feature"
> >>>>> "org.eclipse.datatools.enablement.jdbc.feature"
> >>>>> "org.eclipse.datatools.enablement.msft.feature"
> >>>>> "org.eclipse.datatools.enablement.mysql.feature"
> >>>>> "org.eclipse.datatools.enablement.oda.designer.feature"
> >>>>> "org.eclipse.datatools.enablement.oda.feature"
> >>>>> "org.eclipse.datatools.enablement.oracle.feature"
> >>>>> "org.eclipse.datatools.enablement.postgresql.feature"
> >>>>> "org.eclipse.datatools.enablement.sybase.feature"
> >>>>> "org.eclipse.datatools.modelbase.feature"
> >>>>> "org.eclipse.datatools.sqldevtools.data.feature"
> >>>>> "org.eclipse.datatools.sqldevtools.ddl.feature"
> >>>>> "org.eclipse.datatools.sqldevtools.feature"
> >>>>> "org.eclipse.datatools.sqldevtools.parsers.feature"
> >>>>> "org.eclipse.datatools.sqldevtools.results.feature"
> >>>>> "org.eclipse.emf"
> >>>>> "org.eclipse.emf.common"
> >>>>> "org.eclipse.emf.common.ui"
> >>>>> "org.eclipse.emf.ecore"
> >>>>> "org.eclipse.emf.ecore.edit"
> >>>>> "org.eclipse.emf.ecore.sdo"
> >>>>> "org.eclipse.emf.edit"
> >>>>> "org.eclipse.emf.edit.ui"
> >>>>> "org.eclipse.epp.usagedata.feature"
> >>>>> "org.eclipse.gef"
> >>>>> "org.eclipse.jdt"
> >>>>> "org.eclipse.jpt.feature"
> >>>>> "org.eclipse.jst"
> >>>>> "org.eclipse.mylyn.bugzilla_feature"
> >>>>> "org.eclipse.mylyn.context_feature"
> >>>>> "org.eclipse.mylyn_feature"
> >>>>> "org.eclipse.mylyn.ide_feature"
> >>>>> "org.eclipse.mylyn.java_feature"
> >>>>> "org.eclipse.mylyn.pde_feature"
> >>>>> "org.eclipse.pde"
> >>>>> "org.eclipse.platform"
> >>>>> "org.eclipse.sdk"
> >>>>> "org.eclipse.wst"
> >>>>> "org.eclipse.wst.common_ui.feature"
> >>>>> "org.eclipse.wst.xml_ui.feature"
> >>>>> "org.eclipse.xsd"
> >>>>> "org.eclipse.xsd.edit"
> >>>>> %<
> >>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>> -----
> >>>>> --
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Sunday 03 February 2008, David M Williams wrote:
> >>>>>> The JEE packages does not, and has no plans to (since even an
> >>>>>> incubating project must have a pre 1.0 release review to be
> >>>>>> included ... right?).
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Thanks,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> P.S. I'm just responding so you'll know others do subscribe to
> >>>>>> this list
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> :)
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> From:
> >>>>>> Bjorn Freeman-Benson <bjorn.freeman-benson@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> >>>>>> To:
> >>>>>> epp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> >>>>>> Cc:
> >>>>>> Bjorn Freeman-Benson <bjorn.freeman-benson@xxxxxxxxxxx>, "'Janet
> >>>>>> Campbell'" <janet.campbell@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> >>>>>> Date:
> >>>>>> 02/01/2008 05:39 PM
> >>>>>> Subject:
> >>>>>> [epp-dev] EPP packages containing Incubating projects
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Packagers,
> >>>>>> Janet has alerted me to something I forgot about the packages:
> >>>>>> because they are a "distribution" by the Eclipse Foundation,
> >>>>>> we/you need to make sure that if the packages containing any
> >>>>>> Incubation Phase projects, the packages are correctly labeled as
> >>>>>> such. The standard for labeling is currently described in the
> >>>>>> incubation phase guidelines and includes having the file names
> >>>>>> contain "-incubation-".  So, two
> >>>>>> questions:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> (1) Do any of the existing packages contain projects that are
> >>>>>> incubating or are shipping incubating code?
> >>>>>> (2) If so, when can you change the package build system to include
> >>>>>> the correct incubation phrase and to have the package name itself
> >>>>>> be "JavaEE (Incubation)" (or whatever).
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Thanks,
> >>>>>> - Bjorn
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> -------- Original Message --------
> >>>>>> Subject:
> >>>>>> RE: FW: [eclipse.org-planning-council] EclipseCon and Ganymede M5
> >>>>>> Date:
> >>>>>> Fri, 1 Feb 2008 11:50:58 -0500
> >>>>>> From:
> >>>>>> Janet Campbell <janet.campbell@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> >>>>>> Organization:
> >>>>>> Eclipse Foundation, Inc.
> >>>>>> To:
> >>>>>> 'Bjorn Freeman-Benson' <bjorn.freeman-benson@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> >>>>>> References:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> At a minimum, we should try to be consistent with the naming
> >>>>>> requirements for incubating projects.  Including a notice file in
> >>>>>> the root directory indicating the status of the distribution would
> >>>>>> also help.  What will the person accessing the file be presented
> >>>>>> with?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Janet Campbell