Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [m2m-iwg] m2m-iwg Digest, Vol 21, Issue 5

I hate to look like the bad guy but…
Werner, I am concerned that you are generating too much noise on this mailing list and making it very difficult for people to actually follow discussions. We've been expressing this concerns to you off list, and I am afraid the only solution for now is going to be the moderation of your posts, I'm sorry… Your emails which are on-topic, clear in purpose, and succinct will of course be approved by the moderators.

Dear Eclipse Webmaster, could you please enable moderation of Werner's posts?

Thanks,
Benjamin--
 


De : UOMo <uomo@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Répondre à : m2m Industry Working Group <m2m-iwg@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date : mercredi 3 juillet 2013 19:39
À : "m2m-iwg@xxxxxxxxxxx" <m2m-iwg@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Objet : Re: [m2m-iwg] m2m-iwg Digest, Vol 21, Issue 5

All,

I guess even protocols should be handled with care and not written in stone. Given OASIS alone has 2 for messaging, not to mention other device or domain specific ones, it may not be advisable to list projects or even companies like "Enocean" either.

I mentioned Mylyn earlier. Take a look at its Charter: http://wiki.eclipse.org/Mylyn/Charter which has task-specific items and areas of interest like "Tasks", "Builds", etc. at its heart. Occasionally mentioning examples for concrete (other Eclipse) projects or languages like  JDT (Java files), CDT (C/C++ files),...

This maybe with the addition of "LDT" (Lua files) should be similar here, I guess, but even languages only as a subset, not the only language (which unfortunately some of the sub-projects sometimes make the impression they care little to none about others)

Cheers,
Werner


On Wed, Jul 3, 2013 at 6:00 PM, <m2m-iwg-request@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Send m2m-iwg mailing list submissions to
        m2m-iwg@xxxxxxxxxxx

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
        http://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/m2m-iwg
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
        m2m-iwg-request@xxxxxxxxxxx

You can reach the person managing the list at
        m2m-iwg-owner@xxxxxxxxxxx

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of m2m-iwg digest..."


Today's Topics:

   1. Re: M2M Top-Level Project Charter Draft (Mike Milinkovich)
   2. Re: M2M Top-Level Project Charter Draft (Benjamin Cab?)


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2013 16:09:46 -0400
From: "Mike Milinkovich" <mike.milinkovich@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "'m2m Industry Working Group'" <m2m-iwg@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [m2m-iwg] M2M Top-Level Project Charter Draft
Message-ID: <041501ce7760$195a5800$4c0f0800$@eclipse.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"



I would like to caution against listing specific project names in the
charter. You want a document that stands on its own for a very long time. So
I would suggest changing the content of the Protocols, Services and
Runtimes, and Tools sections to generically refer to topics, rather than to
specific projects.



Mike Milinkovich

mike.milinkovich@xxxxxxxxxxx

+1.613.220.3223



From: m2m-iwg-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:m2m-iwg-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Benjamin Cab?
Sent: July-02-13 10:14 AM
To: m2m Industry Working Group
Subject: Re: [m2m-iwg] M2M Top-Level Project Charter Draft



It was discussed during the call today what was the best way to discuss and
improve the charter.

Everyone should feel free to edit the wiki with additions or corrections (or
name suggestions!), ideally by indicating their name (e.g. "John: Deliver
blah blah") next to the modification.

For more general concerns, I think the mailing-list should be the main
communication channel though, since more people are likely monitoring it
than the wiki, and there are items to discuss that are not yet ready to be
written down in the draft, maybe



Cheers,

Benjamin--





De : Benjamin CABE <BCabe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
R?pondre ? : m2m Industry Working Group <m2m-iwg@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date : lundi 1 juillet 2013 17:18
? : m2m Industry Working Group <m2m-iwg@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Objet : [m2m-iwg] M2M Top-Level Project Charter Draft



All,



I have initalized a wiki page with a charter draft.

http://wiki.eclipse.org/Machine-to-Machine/M2MIWG/TLP_Charter_Draft



I am looking forward to your comments, since it is of course a very first
pass. Also, we can certainly discuss this document further during our call
tomorrow.



Cheers,

Benjamin--





De : Mike Milinkovich <mike.milinkovich@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Soci?t? : Eclipse Foundation
R?pondre ? : "mike.milinkovich@xxxxxxxxxxx" <mike.milinkovich@xxxxxxxxxxx>,
m2m Industry Working Group <m2m-iwg@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date : mardi 11 juin 2013 21:02
? : "m2m-iwg@xxxxxxxxxxx" <m2m-iwg@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Objet : [m2m-iwg] M2M Top-Level Project



All,



The M2M working group has been pretty successful in recruiting projects. Has
the time come to consider creating a new top-level project to help create a
cohesive project community for our M2M technologies?



For those who are unfamiliar with them, top-level projects are the mechanism
which ties a collection of projects in a particular domain to the Eclipse
development and IP processes. It requires the creation of a project
management committee (PMC), the appointment of a PMC leader, and having a
written charter approved by the Board of Directors.



Mike Milinkovich

Executive Director

Eclipse Foundation

mike.milinkovich@xxxxxxxxxxx

+1.613.220.3223 mobile

+1.613.224.9461 x228 office

@mmilinkov



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/private/m2m-iwg/attachments/20130702/5151c483/attachment.html>

------------------------------

Message: 2
Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2013 14:06:27 -0700
From: Benjamin Cab? <bcabe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: m2m Industry Working Group <m2m-iwg@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [m2m-iwg] M2M Top-Level Project Charter Draft
Message-ID: <CDF900D8.45986%BCabe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"


I would like to caution against listing specific project names in the charter. You want a document that stands on its own for a very long time. So I would suggest changing the content of the Protocols, Services and Runtimes, and Tools sections to generically refer to topics, rather than to specific projects.

Agreed.

Actually, I see at least two options for giving some sort of structure to the projects under the TLP, and the current version of the draft is probably not really reflecting any of these:

 *   An option is to create the TLP together with 4 Projects (Communication, Runtimes, Tools, Incubator) right from day 1. These projects would then be structured in sub-projects (e.g Communication/MQTT ?which could/would be Paho I guess?  , Communication/M3DA, Runtimes/xxx etc.). This has the advantage of enforcing some sort of consistency between the components delivered by the projects (APIs, extension points, ?), but has the drawback of forcing a restructuring of the current projects that would arguably be rather heavy (e.g. move under a new namespace).
FWIW this is I think the approach of the Mylyn top-level project, and it works IMO quite well since the projects under Mylyn all deliver both an infrastructure (API and extensions points for doing ALM ) and implementations targeting specific ALM solutions.
 *   Another option is to not give any indication as to what should be the projects under the TLP, and the TLP creation would be done together with a "trivial" move of Paho, Koneki, Mihini (and possibly others) from Technology to the new TLP. This is however not ideal for clarifying what is the TLP about, especially for newcomers or people wondering if the project they want to contribute falls under the TLP or is just "yet another Technology project".
 *   Well? and maybe there is a 3rd option which is sort of a mix. For Paho and Koneki, if one looks at the scope of these projects in their proposals, they would both be good candidates for being umbrellas directly under the TLP for "everything protocols" and "everything tools", especially since their brand names are well installed. So one could imagine having "Paho/MQTT", "Paho/Modbus", "Paho/Enocean", ? and something similar for Koneki (Target Management, Simulator for protocol X, ?). Although I am very much aware that Paho is probably seen as "the MQTT project" and Koneki the "Lua IDE project", I also know that because of the way we've been communicating about the projects so far (projects websites, m2m.eclipse.org website, etc), it is quite clear for many people that these projects have a wider scope ; so maybe it would make sense to restructure these two projects to go in that direction.

As far as I'm concerned, I would be in favor of the last option, but that of course requires further discussion with the aforementioned projects? :-)

What are your thoughts on this?

Benjamin--
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/private/m2m-iwg/attachments/20130702/b2fce06a/attachment.html>

------------------------------

_______________________________________________
m2m-iwg mailing list
m2m-iwg@xxxxxxxxxxx
http://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/m2m-iwg


End of m2m-iwg Digest, Vol 21, Issue 5
**************************************

Back to the top