Re: [modeling-pmc] Re: [m2t-dev] Xpand OCL component proposal (code migr

[Richard Gronback <richard.gronback@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Peter,

I'd say the single most visible element a company has to promote itself as
contributing to Eclipse is its email address.  You and Karsten are the only
ones I can find in Bugzilla that use an @itemis.de address.  Not to say that
all of the committers from a company must use the company address, just that
it's in the company's interest to do so if they want the contributions they
fund to be associated with the company.

Also, and this may just be me, I still see a lot of openArchitectureWare
references and activity that doesn't make it clear who is who and what is
what.  This goes back to old conversations about the identity of these
projects and those who contribute to them.  I think it just adds confusion
(and the last thing we need in the Eclipse Modeling Project is more
confusion ;).

Regarding the Portal, I see 5 committers listed under itemis AG, while as a
Strategic Developer there should be at least 8.  If there are more, I'd
suggest contacting Bjorn to have it corrected.

Best,
Rich


On 8/27/08 4:48 AM, "Peter Friese" <peter.friese@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Hi Rich,
> 
> I am following this discussion with great interest and one of your
> points struck my attention:
> 
> On 26.08.2008, at 15:04, Richard Gronback wrote:
> 
>> Sven,
>> 
>> Thanks for the reply.  Just to summarize my thoughts:
>> 
>> [...]
>> 
>> 3. Having itemis AG as a Strategic Developer member behind you is
>> great, but
>> it's hard to tell exactly who is working for itemis and what they're
>> working
>> on, from my perspective.  This does not serve itemis well, nor the
>> Modeling
>> project at Eclipse, as the fundamental principles here are the "open
>> and
>> transparent" nature of our community.
> 
> Could you elaborate on this a bit? What do you mean by it's hard to
> tell who is working for itemis? To my knowledge, you should be able to
> use the dashboard queries to find out who is working on which
> components. We're trying our best to be transparent (e.g. by having
> our project plan on the wiki, blogging about our work, doing
> screencasts from time to time, talking to people on conferences,
> giving sessions on the stuff we're working on (e.g. at the Eclipse
> Summit 08), participating in the conference calls). However, if you do
> feel that we're not transparent enough, please let us know what
> exactly you a re missing. After all, we can only improve if we know
> what is missing.
> 
> Best,
> Peter
> _______________________________________________
> modeling-pmc mailing list
> modeling-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/modeling-pmc
>