Re: [modeling-pmc] Modeling Project Overhaul

[Miles Parker <milesparker@xxxxxxxxx>]

+1 to all of this. I think it's the right way to go and will have a
really positive effect on acceptance of modeling. I think there are
areas where it makes sense to keep sub-projects and or umbrella
projects but that should be guided by real affinity or obvious
coordination. GMF Runtime and Tooling be handled is one interesting
example. On the one hand they have very obvious affintiy and
coordination needs, but OTOH, GMF Runtime is and I think should be
evolving more to a clean graphical API that isn't so much driven by
being a target for generated code. But XPand, Xtext, XCore etc. have
shown that this can work. Mylyn has a similar overall technology mix,
some tools are intimitly related, some not really at all, but in a few
cases such as Mylyn Context MFT (Model Focussing Tools), we put that
under the Context umbrella because it was an obvious sub-component.

On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 10:02 PM, Ed Merks <ed.merks@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> As you may have noticed, I've been actively removing inactive committers
> from the various modeling projects.
>
> My next task is to terminate inactive projects themselves.  The following
> projects are targets for immediate termination:
>
> http://eclipse.org/projects/project.php?id=modeling.pmf
> http://eclipse.org/projects/project.php?id=modeling.tmf.tcs
> http://eclipse.org/projects/project.php?id=modeling.mdt.uml2-tools
> http://eclipse.org/projects/project.php?id=modeling.mdt.sbvr
> http://eclipse.org/projects/project.php?id=modeling.mdt.imm
> http://eclipse.org/projects/project.php?id=modeling.mdt.mst
> http://eclipse.org/projects/project.php?id=modeling.gmt.viatra2
> http://eclipse.org/projects/project.php?id=modeling.gmt.omcw
> http://eclipse.org/projects/project.php?id=modeling.gmt.mofscript
> http://eclipse.org/projects/project.php?id=modeling.gmt.gems
> http://eclipse.org/projects/project.php?id=modeling.gmt
> http://eclipse.org/projects/project.php?id=modeling.gmt.am3
> http://eclipse.org/projects/project.php?id=modeling.emft.temporality
> http://eclipse.org/projects/project.php?id=modeling.emft.servus
> http://eclipse.org/projects/project.php?id=modeling.emft.search
> http://eclipse.org/projects/project.php?id=modeling.emft.mxf
> http://eclipse.org/projects/project.php?id=modeling.emft.mtf
> http://eclipse.org/projects/project.php?id=modeling.emft.jcrm
> http://eclipse.org/projects/project.php?id=modeling.emf.sdo
> http://eclipse.org/projects/project.php?id=modeling.emft.emfatic
> http://eclipse.org/projects/project.php?id=modeling.emft.emf4net
> http://eclipse.org/projects/project.php?id=modeling.emft.mint
>
> I'm in discussion with Yves Yang about PMF's future.  I'm asking Epsilon to
> absorb the code base from Emfatic.  The UML2 Tools code base will be
> absorbed as a GMF Tooling sample.  Does anyone have concerns or comments
> about this list?  I.e., are there any projects I should add to or remove
> from this list?
>
> I'd also like to rethink the need for "umbrella projects."  With the current
> development processes and infastructure at Eclipse, they no longer seem to
> serve a useful purpose.  In fact, maintaining an appropriate committer list
> for them is proving problematic.  In other words, I'm proposing to eliminate
> all of the following:
>
> EMF
> EMFT
> GMP
> GMT
> MDT
> M2M
> M2T
> TMF
>
> The primary point to consider is that consumers could not care less about
> hierarchical project structure.  In fact, it's likely they don't even care
> about project structure, period.  The consumers are interested in
> technologies and solutions that they can apply to their problem domain.
> Overall, the current website is worse than useless in terms addressing
> consumer needs, though there are some notable project-specific exceptions.
> Mostly the website is confusing, out-dated, and disorganized resulting in an
> overall bad impression of our excellent technologies.  Picking an example
> close to home, have a look at the EMF home page.  "News" is from 2009?  What
> does that say about the project?  In the end, that page more of a dirty
> laundry list than anything useful for consumers.  And it's not the only
> example of that...
>
> I think we need to start with a fresh website to ensure that we arrive at
> something that's usable and easy to maintain so that we never again end up
> in the state we're in right now.  I'd like throw out what have now in CVS
> and start with a new basis that is maintained in git.  The focus will be on
> the "main" message on the landing page as well as mechanisms for helping
> consumers find relevant technologies and solutions that address their
> specific needs.  I'll also look at providing some exemplary project-specific
> home pages to set the stage.  Wayne's approach of automatically rendering a
> home page from project metadata is something I'll look at closely.
> Wouldn't it be nice to have a common and consistent way to determine
> project-specific source repos, p2 repos, forums, bug tracking, and so on?
> Of course I'll provide ample opportunity for others to review the progress
> and to get involved.
>
> If any of you have have comments, criticisms, or concerns, I'm happy to hear
> about them.
>
> Regards,
> Ed
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> modeling-pmc mailing list
> modeling-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/modeling-pmc
>