| In the last RT PMC call we discussed the appropriateness of creating an exemption for the Spring IDE dependency (CQ 4838) of the Virgo tooling on the basis that:
1. This dependency will be excised before the Virgo tooling is released. 2. It is likely that most people who try out milestones of the tooling will be existing Virgo users who are therefore likely to have Spring IDE already installed (in order to be able to use the SpringSource tooling for Virgo). 3. This will save effort for the currently over-committed IP team.
I checked with Wayne and he considers this appropriate (interchange below), but need the RT PMC to agree.
If there are no objections by close of business tomorrow (Wednesday 9 February 2011), I would be grateful if a PMC member could provide approval so that we can enable the EMO to go ahead and grant the exemption.
Begin forwarded message: Date: 8 February 2011 02:58:30 GMT
Subject: Re: Fwd: Spring IDE CQ 4838
Sorry... I missed the original note. We do need PMC approval prior to taking this to the EMO(ED). Wayne On 02/07/2011 09:05 PM, Glyn Normington wrote: Hi Wayne
Please could you look into granting EMO(ED) approval as this is holding
up our tooling donation. Thanks!
Regards,
Glyn
Begin forwarded message:
*From: *Glyn Normington <gnormington@xxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:gnormington@xxxxxxxxxx>>
*Date: *1 February 2011 19:57:14 GMT
*To: *Wayne Beaton <wayne@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:wayne@xxxxxxxxxxx>>
*Cc: *Janet Campbell <janet.campbell@xxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:janet.campbell@xxxxxxxxxxx>>, emo-ip-team@xxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:emo-ip-team@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Tom Watson <tjwatson@xxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:tjwatson@xxxxxxxxxx>>, Martin Lippert <mlippert@xxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:mlippert@xxxxxxxxxx>>
*Subject: **Re: Spring IDE CQ 4838*
Done. Please see:
https://dev.eclipse.org/ipzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4838
and take it from there. I am assuming no RT PMC approval is needed
first, but please correct me if I am wrong.
Regards,
Glyn
On 1 Feb 2011, at 17:57, Wayne Beaton wrote:
Request that it be declared as such on the CQ. We'll take it from there.
Wayne
On 02/01/2011 11:42 AM, Glyn Normington wrote:
I suppose we can argue that the Spring IDE dependency will only be
required for milestones until we have excised it and on that basis,
the majority of users are going to be those using the tooling
already, who will indeed have Spring IDE installed.
Please could you tell me how I obtain EMO(ED) approval for this to
be an exempt pre-req?
Regards,
Glyn
On 1 Feb 2011, at 17:37, Wayne Beaton wrote:
Sounds like an exempt pre-req candidate on the grounds that we can
reasonably expect that the sort of developer who would use this stuff
would have Spring IDE on their workstation. That will require EMO(ED)
approval.
Does this make sense, or have I missed the point?
Wayne
On 02/01/2011 11:26 AM, Glyn Normington wrote:
Thanks Wayne. I don't think "workwith" is really appropriate as
the current Virgo tooling bundles won't even resolve without
Spring IDE present.
Looks like we need a full CQ. Agreed?
Regards,
Glyn
On 31 Jan 2011, at 22:07, Wayne Beaton wrote:
Exempt status requires approval of EMO(ED). Further, a
'prerequisite may
be classified as "exempt" by the EMO if the software is pervasive in
nature, expected to be already on the user's machine, and/or an IP
review would be either impossible, impractical, or inadvisable.'
I suppose that we could argue impractical or inadvisable, but
those are
relatively hard to motivate. Is this something that the type of
user who
would use this software would very likely already have installed on
their workstation when they load up these tools?
FWIW, we were thinking "workswith" on the basis that Virgo itself is
generally interesting and functions well without this software
and that
the tools--which are a relatively small part of the Virgo story--work
better with this software present.
Once we get approval, then yes, it is acceptable to ship a milestone
with that dependency. Whether we go "exempt" or "workswith" you can't
actually ship the software from eclipse.org.
Make sense?
Wayne
On 01/28/2011 03:49 AM, Glyn Normington wrote:
Hi Janet
I should perhaps have made my question clear: if the RT PMC
exempts this third party dependency (Spring IDE), is it
legitimate to ship a milestone of the Eclipse software (i.e. the
Virgo tooling) which depends upon that dependency?
Regards,
Glyn
On 27 Jan 2011, at 16:28, Glyn Normington wrote:
Hi Janet
I don't think workswith is suitable. To be clear in this case:
* The Eclipse software does require the third party software to
be present
* Milestones will require the third party software to be present
* Prior to the first release of the Eclipse software, it will
be re-engineered so that it no longer depends on the third
party software.
So I'm afraid we have to choose between an exempt prereq,
favoured by the RT PMC, and a full CQ.
Regards,
Glyn
On 27 Jan 2011, at 15:24, Janet Campbell wrote:
Hi Glyn,
Thanks for working through this with us. It strikes us that
the dependency
would be more of a workswith dependency fitting under this
section of the
policy:
"The Eclipse software does not require the third party
software to be
present. If the third party software happens to be present,
the Eclipse
software may call or invoke it. Example: If a web browser is
present,
clicking on URL's in Eclipse will cause the user's configured
web browser to
open the URL."
If you agree, we could proceed on that basis. There's no
difficulty for a
milestone to have such a dependency.
Regards,
Janet
-----Original Message-----
From: Glyn Normington [mailto:gnormington@xxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, January 26, 2011 9:40 AM
To: emo-ip-team@xxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: Tom Watson
Subject: Spring IDE CQ 4838
CQ 4838 contains some compile-time dependencies of the Virgo
tooling. We
plan to modify the Virgo tooling code (being contributed under
CQ 4838)
before its first release so it no longer depends on Spring IDE.
At today's RT PMC call it was suggested that the best way to
handle CQ 4838
should be to exempt it on the condition that we will remove
all dependencies
on it from the Virgo tooling before the first release. The
idea was to
minimise the load on the IP team.
Virgo would however want to issue tooling milestones before
the dependency
was removed. To clarify, users would not download the code for
CQ 4838 from
Eclipse but would obtain it from a SpringSource update site.
So I just wanted to check that it is legitimate for a
milestone to have such
an exempt dependency. If so, I will obtain the exemption via
the RT PMC
mailing list.
Thanks.
Regards,
Glyn
|
