Re: [mylyn-dev] Project restructuring progress

[Mik Kersten <mik@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Yes, we have the inherent problem of the project names being self-referential when we are talking about our use of those same ALM services.  For now, when we need to qualify the meaning, I suggest we tack on “Project” or “API” to the end to qualify what we’re talking about.

 

Mik

--

Dr. Mik Kersten

Tasktop CEO, Mylyn Lead, http://twitter.com/mik_kersten

Assistant: zoe.jong@xxxxxxxxxxx, +1-778-588-6896, Skype: zoe.e.jong

 

From: mylyn-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:mylyn-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of David Green
Sent: October-06-10 9:43 AM
To: Mylyn developer discussions
Subject: Re: [mylyn-dev] Project restructuring progress

 

As discussed in the meeting, naming for these is quite difficult because of the nature of the projects being about developer tools.  For example, how do you talk about builds for the builds subproject?  We'll have to come up with some informal conventions to avoid confusion.

 

+1 for the naming listed below.

On Fri, Oct 1, 2010 at 2:00 AM, Mik Kersten <mik@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Following up today’s call, here is what we propose as the final naming of the framework projects and their common acronyms:
* Tasks: CM, QM, TM, …

* Contexts: TFI

* Versions: SCM, CVS, DVCS, DRCS, RCS

* Builds: CI, BM

* Reviews: QM, QA

* Docs: …

* Commons: …

 

If you have any feedback, please yell now or forever hold your peace, as we plan on initiating the provisioning shortly.

 

Mik

 

--

Dr. Mik Kersten

Tasktop CEO, Mylyn Lead

http://twitter.com/mik_kersten

 

From: mylyn-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:mylyn-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Steffen Pingel
Sent: September-23-10 1:15 PM
To: Mylyn developer discussions
Subject: [mylyn-dev] Project restructuring progress

 

Hi,

we made good progress on today's call on how to proceed with the provisioning of the Mylyn sub-projects. To summarize, I suggested to reconsider creating sub-sub-projects for reference implementations and instead manage them in their parent framework projects. Essentially this is what we outlined in the original restructuring proposal: http://wiki.eclipse.org/Mylyn/Restructuring .

It lowers overhead by reducing the number of projects and still leaves the option to split out components into separate projects as needed in the future. Committers would potentially end up with commit rights on a larger number of bundles but we have successfully used social conventions in the past to manage write access.

The next step is to finalize the naming of the sub-projects before we can go ahead and move CVS directories and Bugzilla bugs to their new locations.

Everyone, please feel free to chime in if you have any thoughts on the proposed structure. 

Steffen

-- 
Steffen Pingel
Committer, http://eclipse.org/mylyn
Senior Developer, http://tasktop.com

_______________________________________________
mylyn-dev mailing list
mylyn-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/mylyn-dev

--

David Green

VP of Engineering, Tasktop

Committer, Eclipse Mylyn

http://tasktop.com