Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [orbit-dev] Contribution to Orbit of code from existing Eclipse Project

> ...  I think the only other option we have is removing (deprecating?)
> 3rdparty packages from Orbit and telling people to use the version
> maintained by XYZ at ABC. That does sound confusing, though.

Thanks Gunnar. If the goal is to reduce confusion between the EPL licensed
one, and the CDDL licensed one, I'd prefer to remove it from active builds
(leaving in anything already "released" of course) rather than having
Eclipse projects putting things in Orbit repo. That sounds confusing to me
(and, still sounds out of scope, which we should take seriously ... and
we'll let Jesse start a new project to be "single repository of everything
for everybody" :)

>From looking at file system of "releases" repo, the 1.0.0 version (from
Orbit) has not been used since at least Galileo and there have been
"plenty" of new releases since.

./galileo/200909241140/aggregate/plugins/javax.persistence_1.99.0.v200906021518.jar
./galileo/201002260900/aggregate/plugins/javax.persistence_1.99.0.v200906021518.jar
./helios/201102250900/aggregate/plugins/javax.persistence_2.0.1.v201006031150.jar
./helios/201009240900/aggregate/plugins/javax.persistence_2.0.1.v201006031150.jar
./helios/201006230900/aggregate/plugins/javax.persistence_2.0.1.v201006031150.jar
./juno/201108190900/aggregate/plugins/javax.persistence_2.0.3.v201010191057.jar
./juno/201111110900/aggregate/plugins/javax.persistence_2.0.3.v201010191057.jar
./juno/201112160900/aggregate/plugins/javax.persistence_2.0.3.v201010191057.jar
./juno/201109300900/aggregate/plugins/javax.persistence_2.0.3.v201010191057.jar
./indigo/201106220900/aggregate/plugins/javax.persistence_2.0.3.v201010191057.jar
./indigo/201109230900/aggregate/plugins/javax.persistence_2.0.3.v201010191057.jar

In fact, I like this idea so much, I opened a bug to track it :)
https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=370295


But, appreciate the additional information and discussion.

Thanks,





From:	Gunnar Wagenknecht <gunnar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To:	Orbit Developer discussion <orbit-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>,
Date:	02/01/2012 01:05 AM
Subject:	Re: [orbit-dev] Contribution to Orbit of code from existing
            Eclipse Project
Sent by:	orbit-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx



Am 31.01.2012 22:07, schrieb Tom Ware:
> The reason we are considering Orbit is that the code we are spinning off
is in a
> javax package (javax.persistence).  It is a third party library - in that
it is
> a library we depend on to run that is potentially used by other parties
that do
> not use our project's code.  The unusual part about it is that we are
both the
> main contributers to the Eclipse project that uses it and the "3rd party"
the
> provides the library.

javax.persistence is in Orbit already. We need to make sure that there
aren't multiple different versions of it flying around. Thus, I think
it's great to have the EclipseLink project contributing their version of
javax.persistence to Orbit and ensuring that it will be maintained going
forward. A big +1 from my side.

Tom, are there any modifications you did to javax.persistence that
aren't implemented in the "official" javax.persistence package?

Usually Orbit contains binary bundles. Thus, I wonder if the source has
a better home in a Git repository owned by the EclipseLink project
itself. Just the binary bits would be published to Orbit.

David, I think the only other option we have is removing (deprecating?)
3rdparty packages from Orbit and telling people to use the version
maintained by XYZ at ABC. That does sound confusing, though.

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





Back to the top