> <
nicolas.richeton@xxxxxxxxx
<mailto:
nicolas.richeton@xxxxxxxxx>>
wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I'm not sure that
creating subprojects for a single
widget would
>> be a good thing. I
understand the reasons why NatTable
needs to be
>> a subproject, but I think
these are issues we have to solve for
>> every widget :
>>
>> * Being able to install
independently :
>> Each widget has his own
plugins : widget, tests, feature, ...
>> This won't change.
>> Version numbers do not
necessary have to be in sync for all
Nebula
>> widgets.
>>
>> * Having its own build
>> XViewer already have his
own build because eclipse projects
>> depends on it. This is
something that can be done without
being a
>> subproject, but I still
think this should be avoided. (If we
look
>> at an another projet : I
believe SWT build fails if tests for
one
>> component fail). The key
thing is : projects which depends on
>> Nebula should not build
against the trunk. They should build
>> against an integration or
a release branch/site which always
>> builds. We have setup
things in a way that make this work.
>>
>> * Being able to release
with its own schedule.
>> We are looking for a 1.0
nebula release with several widgets,
but
>> we will always have to
fix major/critial issues on a widget
>> without waiting for the
next major Nebula release. I believe
we
>> have to see a nebula
release as a snapshot of the current
stable
>> widgets (for the annual
eclipse release train) and keep an
update
>> site with
intermediate/frequent releases.
>>
>> It NatTable committers
are ready to go fast and get out of
>> incubation right away, I
rather remove all widgets from the
>> release project, keeping
only NatTable and then add every
stable
>> widget one after one,
than going thru the eclipse process
for only
>> one subproject.
>>
>> That said, everything is
possible :-)
>> --
>> Nicolas
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Le 21 nov. 2011 à 23:26,
Tom Schindl a écrit :
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> +1 for me on moving
forward as a subproject to Nebula but
Wim I'd
>>> like
>>> to hear Wims and
Nicolas' input.
>>>
>>> Tom
>>>
>>> Am 21.11.11 23:05,
schrieb Edwin Park:
>>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> Once upon a time,
there was a proposal to bring NatTable
to
>>>> Eclipse... :-)
>>>>
>>>> It has taken some
time, but we've gotten through all the
IP
>>>> attribution
issues finally and I have the go ahead
from Eclipse
>>>> legal
>>>> to push this
forward again. In the meantime I know
Nebula has been
>>>> going through
changes as well. Importantly, in order
to move forward
>>>> this needs to be
pushed by the Nebula folks. Tom, would
you still be
>>>> the one to do
this or does that fall to Wim now?
>>>>
>>>> Also, I wanted to
update everyone on the current status
and sync
>>>> up on
>>>> the plan for
moving forward to make sure we're all
on the same page:
>>>>
>>>> The original New
Widget request for NatTable is here:
>>>>
https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=328836
>>>> The latest
version of the code attached to this
is NatTable
>>>> 2.2.0. The
>>>> current
production version is 2.3.0. No
additional dependencies have
>>>> been added in the
interim, but there is new post-2.3.0
code in trunk
>>>> that introduces a
new dependency on Apache Poi for table
export.
>>>> This
>>>> is packaged as a
separate extension bundle however, so
if there are
>>>> issues with this
we can always omit it from moving over
to Eclipse.
>>>>
>>>> The NatTable
Eclipse Project Proposal is here:
>>>>
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Krpj0ceaWqP-WndbR1Ba79gwhGCbUHNspw-j9naYPQc/edit?hl=en_US
>>>> The only update
that may need to be made for this is
the tentative
>>>> project schedule,
which currently indicates code
contribution and
>>>> migration to
Eclipse is Q4 2011..
>>>>
>>>> The plan for
moving NatTable to Nebula was to make
it a Nebula
>>>> subproject rather
than incorporating it into the
conglomerate Nebula
>>>> project and
build. Tom and I favored this approach
because we wanted
>>>> to preserve the
ability for NatTable to maintain its
own independent
>>>> release schedule.
NatTable has 7 active committers and a
history of
>>>> putting out
regular releases over the past four
years. I'm happy to
>>>> take on the
additional maintenance overhead of
treating NatTable
>>>> as a
>>>> separate project
since that's what it is now anyway.
>>>>
>>>> Wayne needs
confirmation from the Nebula project
that we want to
>>>> move
>>>> forward with
NatTable as a Nebula subproject, and
then my
>>>> understanding
from legal is that we'd need someone
from Nebula
>>>> to kick
>>>> off the CQ.
>>>>
>>>> It's been over a
year since we started this journey and
I'm eager to
>>>> see this through.
:-)
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Edwin
>>>>
_______________________________________________
>>>> nebula-dev
mailing list