By this kind of argument one could argue
all of RT should only have one committer group and we use social conventions
to avoid writing in the wrong area. Personally I see p2 and Equinox framework
as quite different projects. Equinox framework is agnostic of what provisioning
technology is used to install it, and it has no knowledge or dependency
on p2. Similarly p2 could be used to provision other OSGi implementations
of even non-OSGi applications. The two projects have no overlap in active
committers that I can think of. They share a website repository but have
separate web sites. I really don't see any violation of the spirit of the
EDP in having them as separate projects. Just my $0.02...
Wayne Beaton <wayne@xxxxxxxxxxx>
12/06/2012 01:02 PM
Is there real need to protect different functional areas
within the project?
Is there danger that a "website" committer might start hacking
I'm having trouble understanding why subprojects are required at all. Equinox
builds and releases as a single thing. There is a single website. All of
the subproject repositories are in a single location. The only reason that
I can think of to have subprojects is so that you can have ACLs against
different functional areas within the same project. While this may align
with the wording of the EDP, I think that it violates the spirit of it.
Is there any reason why we can't just collapse *all* of the Equinox subprojects
into the parent and be be left with rt.equinox?
The CDT project, for example, does this. They have one set of committers.
Within the project they manage who accesses what by social convention rather
than enforced access control. Is there valid concern that we need to keep
p2 committers from touching framework stuff?
Collapsing would solve the website problem, wouldn't it?
On 12/06/2012 10:00 AM, John Arthorne wrote:
+1 on terminating rt.equinox.security. Effectively we
did this during the Git migration and forgot to do the full process.
I don't care either way about combining bundles+framework. They do have
fairly distinct committer lists and they seem to be functioning fine in
their current form. On the other hand I would trust all the committers
to only work in their area of expertise so I have nothing against combining
them. I tend to agree with Wayne that effectively they operate as a single
On the website, the other big issue is that the Equinox download directory
is owned by the website project. So between the downloads and web sites
I do think all the Equinox committers need to have commit rights. Whether
that is done via a separate project or ACL magic from the webmasters like
Platform does, I don't mind either way. When dealing with several
different directories I tend to think the ACL approach would be a pain
to manage. Looking at the members of the website ACL, it does look in need
of some cleanup at least - even McQ is a committer there :)
rt.equinox.security should have been roled up into rt.equinox.bundles.
At least we moved all the security code into the rt.equinox.bundles
repository and have one commit group for that repository. So technically
it is a candidate for termination, but the code did not go away.
Personally I would be fine with combining rt.equinox.bundles and rt.equinox.framework
into one project under rt.equinox and leaving rt.equinox.p2 as the sole
subproject. This means all rt.equinox.bundles committers would gain
commit rights to the rt.equinox.framework repo and vise-versa. I'm
not sure what to do about rt.equinox.website project. If you have
an easy way to also combine it into rt.equinox then that is fine. But
we must allow rt.equinox.p2 committers to still have access to the web
Others have opinions?
Beaton ---12/05/2012 04:29:34 PM---I just noticed that some of the Equinox
subprojects do not have any source repositories listed .
I just noticed that some of the Equinox subprojects do not have any source
repositories listed . In fact, most of them have no metadata specified
Further, upon inspection, it appears that the rt.equinox.security project
has no resources associated with it (no Git repository, no downloads that
I can detect, no website). Is this project still viable, or is it a candidate
The rt.equinox.website project is a hold over from the bad-old-days. Is
that project still required? Can we kill it and assign the website repository
Is it still valuable to have Equinox subprojects at all? Based on the use
of the projects, it seems that the only purpose is to keep the committer
lists distinct. Is this still necessary? AFAICT, only rt.equinox.p2 seems
to be operating as a separate project. Does it make sense to consider rolling
the rest of the projects up into the parent?