[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [equinox-dev] Equinox Subprojects

In my experience this creates quite a bit of non-trivial additional management overhead to have an independent project. When Equinox was split out of Platform it created a major ongoing effort of separate release reviews, plans, release train checklists, ip logs, etc. If someone wants to do it, knock yourself out ;) I really don't see a problem with the status quo, apart from the obvious equinox security component that needs to be terminated (code was already moved into rt.equinox.bundles).

John



From:        Pascal Rapicault <pascal.rapicault@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
To:        Equinox development mailing list <equinox-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>,
Date:        12/07/2012 02:25 PM
Subject:        Re: [equinox-dev] Equinox Subprojects
Sent by:        equinox-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx




Just to be clear, Iâm not pushing for this to happen. That was just a thought triggered from Wayneâs comment.
 
From: equinox-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:equinox-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Thomas Watson
Sent:
December-07-12 2:17 PM
To:
Equinox development mailing list
Subject:
Re: [equinox-dev] Equinox Subprojects

 

Whatever is currently in the rt.equinox.p2 repo stays with the p2 project IMO ;-)

Personally I don't see the advantage of making p2 a separate project under RT, but if the p2 leads want to do it it is fine by me.  I don't think it will give you any more freedom than you have today.

Tom



Inactive hide details for Ian Bull ---12/07/2012 12:02:08 PM---I certainly wouldn't be opposed to making p2 its own project, buIan Bull ---12/07/2012 12:02:08 PM---I certainly wouldn't be opposed to making p2 its own project, but how much extra overhead in involve

From:
Ian Bull <irbull@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To:
Equinox development mailing list <equinox-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>,
Date:
12/07/2012 12:02 PM
Subject:
Re: [equinox-dev] Equinox Subprojects
Sent by:
equinox-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx






I certainly wouldn't be opposed to making p2 its own project, but how much extra overhead in involved (managerial -- release, docware, etc... and technical -- builds, platform contribution, etc..)?  Also, there are a few components (simple configurator for example), which are kinda p2 and kinda platform and sorta equinox. I guess Pascal and Tom would have a good idea of where to place these things (they're in p2 right now).

cheers,
ian


On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 12:07 AM, Gunnar Wagenknecht <
gunnar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Am 06.12.2012 23:46, schrieb Pascal Rapicault:
Another solution is to make p2 a project in of itself.

That's what I was thinking.


-Gunnar



--
Gunnar Wagenknecht

gunnar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://wagenknecht.org/


_______________________________________________
equinox-dev mailing list

equinox-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev



--
R. Ian Bull | EclipseSource Victoria | +1 250 477 7484

http://eclipsesource.com | http://twitter.com/eclipsesource_______________________________________________
equinox-dev mailing list

equinox-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev_______________________________________________
equinox-dev mailing list
equinox-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev