Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [gmf-dev] GMF Tooling Committers

Hello, Anthony, Artem and All,

I would like to formally ask to nominate me to be a GMF tooling committer.

Since 2006 I participated in the various development related to GMF tooling, including:
- contributing initial code-generation for the GMFGraph
- reconciler support
- support for the border-items at the generation level
- other minor features and various bug fixes.

As a UML2Tools developer, I was one of the first adopters of the GMF-T technology, developing and maintaining the set of GMF-generated editors for UML2.
While UML2Tools has not yet quit incubation, it has a record of successful participation in Eclipse Ganymede and Galileo simultaneous releases, following the GMF from 1.x to its most recent 2.3 release.

Here is the list of the GMF bugs related to me: http://bit.ly/dHNnyc . While some (or even may be a lot) of those 145 Bugzilla's don't have an attached patches / solutions, most of the reported problems had been at least worked around in the scope of the UML2Tools.
So I strongly believe I have very good understanding of actual state of the GMF-T, both of its strongest parts and most critical problems, and as such I hope to be a valuable addition to the existing team.

For last couple of days I was working with GMF users newsgroup trying to both understand the actual needs of GMFT-users and to help them to solve day-to-day problems,
and I feel that I understand the most important issues that have to be fixed and most demanded features that have to be delivered.

And while I would be probably fine by just submitting the patches, I feel that obtaining the GMFT committer status would definitely help me to contribute more to the community.

With regards to the component leadership, I am sure that Artem is the best possible choice for the component and personally hope that he will find a way to continue leading the GMF-T.
We have already discussed the possible road-map for GMF-T and hopefully share the same overall vision. And while we may differ in some technical approaches,
I understand and support his authority and would agree with his right of the veto for at least all of the near-future changes.

Regards,
Michael Golubev



Back to the top