Hi Ronnie,
Marcel will be out on vacation from
tomorrow on. But anyway I agree we should have a call this week. Other
engineers from my team can participate.
These are some suggested times that are
fine with my team:
1) Tue, 16:30 Brazil time (12:30PST)
2) Wed, 13:00 Brazil time (9:00PST)
3) Wed, 16:00 Brazil time (12:00PST)
4) Thu, 14:00 Brazil time (10:00PST)
5) Thu, 17:00 Brazil time (13:00PST)
Please let me know which choice fits
better for you.
Thanks and regards,
Ruth
From:
sequoyah-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:sequoyah-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Ronnie.King@xxxxxxxxx
Sent: Monday, March 29, 2010 4:46
PM
To: sequoyah-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: wrs066@xxxxxxxxxxxx;
mobile-iwg@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [sequoyah-dev] Re:
[mobile-iwg] Pulsar SDK discovery work forHelios
Hi Marcel,
David monitors this list, so you can direct questions to him here on the list
and he will respond.
One additional comment, we should think about having a quick sync up call this
week. It would help to understand what areas people are focused on, if any, for
the next few weeks and also try to get some commitment on other supporting
areas like docs and test coverage.
Any suggestions?
Regards,
Ronnie
On 3/26/10 8:19 AM, "ext Marcel Gorri" <wmg040@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi Ronnie,
can you point us to David Dubrow so we can discuss the items you raised in
previous emails? (I copied them below):
- Confirmation of metadata model changes and
or compatibility
- Integration of latest changes to the P2 api
updates from M6
- Design discussion on SDK view changes
needed for discovery UI update, what additional extensions may be needed for
SDK vendors
- Other changes that may be needed for the
engine
- Changes required for metadata generator
tool
- Test cycles with update servers
>From our side, we are already investigating those points so we can evolve
this solution as fast as possible.
Tks,
Marcel
On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 5:47 PM, <Ronnie.King@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Hi
Guys,
I’m pretty sure that the development would be coming from member
companies, so the IP reviews should be less troublesome than if the code were
coming from an unknown source. In any case, let’s discuss with Sharon to see what our
options would be if we need something expedited. I’m pretty sure by next
week we should be able to come to an agreement.
On the metadata, it would be good to get confirmation that it will be backward
compatible with the current model. I know many assume that it will be, but it
would be good to remove any doubt there so SDK vendors can plan on adjusting if
need be.
Regards,
Ronnie
From: mobile-iwg-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:mobile-iwg-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of ext Christian Kurzke
Sent: Wednesday, March 17, 2010
12:48 PM
To: Sequoyah Developers
Cc: mobile-iwg@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [sequoyah-dev] Re:
[mobile-iwg] Pulsar SDK discovery work for Helios
Ronnie, Eric,
My biggest concern in this is the fact that the code would have to pass the
Eclipse Foundation Contribution process, which includes the IP review and code
scanning.
I recommend to contact Sharon
and see if there is any chance this can get reviewed as a contribution so late
in the game.
While i agree that it would be very nice to have the Mylin integration for
Helios, i am very concerned that this may introduce a huge risk of not hitting
the milestone at all.
As an alternative, I would suggest to participate in the Helios release with a
minimum risk (aka plain P2 update) code, and then add the Mylin code at the
first Maintainance Release.
One concern i have for this is also the change of the SDK provider meta-data.
Marcel, can you please explain next week at the meeting how your proposed code
impacts the P2 Meta Data of the SDK providers?
I hope those changes are minimal (or none at all), which would be another
reason for not rushing the Mylin code into the Helios release.
-Christian
On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 10:30 AM, <Ronnie.King@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Hi Eric,
Yes, I will be at the meeting on Wed. I agree that we should plan on getting an
agreement on what exactly we believe can be accomplished in the time that we
have remaining for Helios and hopefully get commitments from interested parties
as to what areas we can expect support on. This is very similar to what
happened with Galileo last year, we had to limit what was done due to time, but
we were able to pull in the targets with support from everyone who participated
in the project.
And yes, I fully understand the additional areas that need to be factored in,
documentation, SDK vendor coordination, testing, IP review, etc, which is
exactly why we need to make sure that there is a strong push to do everything
out in the open so we can solicit help where needed.
On the feature risk, I can certainly appreciate the concern there but I do
think that we should make a concerted effort to align with the platform changes
that will be supported in Helios, meaning the discovery UI updates. From my
understanding the integration of these api’s to P2 are complete, which
means we should be able to align the SDK view with the new model. This will of
course also require changes to the metadata for including icons, data, etc, but
this should be capable of completing in the timeframe if we get commitments
from the others on the project.
Regards,
Ronnie
From: mobile-iwg-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:mobile-iwg-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of ext ERIC CLONINGER
Sent: Wednesday, March 17, 2010
11:51 AM
To: Mobile Industry Working Group
Cc: sequoyah-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [sequoyah-dev] Re:
[mobile-iwg] Pulsar SDK discovery work for Helios
Hi Ronnie,
Will you and/or David be at the Pulsar meeting on Wednesday morning (10 am -
noon)? We should discuss this effort from a logistical viewpoint.
My biggest concern is that we are introducing a significant volume of code
immediately prior to the last milestone before release candidates start rolling
out. In addition to the risk of destabilizing the build and running into test
incompatibilities, there is also the issue of getting the IP review done on
this code. As we're approaching the release the IP reviews tend to take more
time.
In addition to the code contribution and the things you mention below, there is
also the test effort to be defined and executed.
Regards
-E
On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 2:08 PM, <Ronnie.King@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Hi,
We(Nokia) will be providing development effort for getting the discovery UI
model hooked up to the Pulsar SDK view, so what I would suggest is that we
approach this in a collaborative way and put a plan together on how we can get
this support in by Apr30 (M7). From our team, David Dubrow is
researching/tracking the latest changes in the Equinox project, and will be
looking into hooking up the discovery UI model.
Here’s a quick pass at the items that we see are needed to be done:
-
Confirmation of metadata model
changes and or compatibility : David/Nokia
- Integration of latest changes to the P2 api updates from
M6 : Daniel(?)/Motorola
- Design discussion on SDK view changes needed for discovery
UI update, what additional extensions may be needed for SDK vendors : David,
Daniel, ?/Nokia, Mot, any others?
- Other changes that may be needed for the engine :
David/Nokia, other?
- Changes required for metadata generator tool : ?
- Test cycles with update servers : ?(All?)
It would be good to get your feedback on these, or if you have additional items
to add.
Regards,
Ronnie
From: sequoyah-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:sequoyah-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of ext Marcel Gorri
Sent: Monday, March 15, 2010 7:09
AM
To: Sequoyah Developers
Cc: mobile-iwg@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [sequoyah-dev] Re:
[mobile-iwg] Pulsar SDK discovery work for Helios
Hi Ronnie,
unfortunately, we didn't have time to plan carefully what is going to be the
Mylyn based solution due our Helios integration deadlines, that's why we went
for a P2 based solution. As soon as we have time to explore the Mylyn solution,
we'll provide you more details.
Tks,
Marcel
On Sat, Mar 13, 2010 at 4:11 PM, <Ronnie.King@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Marcel,
Could you provide more details on what you are planning to contribute after you
complete the Helios integration builds? If the Mylyn discovery UI is going to
be included, it would be good to know if this will include backward
compatibility with the current metadata model or will it require changes by all
of the SDK vendors?
Thanks,
Ronnie
On 3/12/10 12:22 PM, "ext Marcel Gorri" <wmg040@xxxxxxxxxxxx <http://wmg040@xxxxxxxxxxxx> >
wrote:
Hi Eric,
yes, for now we have SDK Discovery fixed based only on P2 API. We are not
integrating anything from Mylyn due to time constraints. As soon as we have
Helios train ok, we'll restart this work.
Tks,
Marcel
On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 7:03 PM, ERIC CLONINGER <ericc@xxxxxxxxxxxx
<http://ericc@xxxxxxxxxxxx> >
wrote:
Hi David,
This work is providing only enough P2 work to discover and handle the packages.
There is not, to my knowledge, anything being done with the Mylyn discovery UI.
I don't know the details of how it's being done, so I'm including Daniel on
this chain.
-E
On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 3:33 PM, <David.Dubrow@xxxxxxxxx
<http://David.Dubrow@xxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
Just wondering if this work is being based on the the current work of moving
the Mylyn discovery UI and some of its metadata into p2 for Helios or strictly
on Mylyn?
See this bugzilla:
https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=299245
David Dubrow
Nokia
On 3/10/10 11:10 AM, "ext ERIC CLONINGER" <dcp874@xxxxxxxxxxxx <http://dcp874@xxxxxxxxxxxx> <http://dcp874@xxxxxxxxxxxx> >
wrote:
Hello Pulsar members,
We made a decision at the last Sequoyah call regarding the SDK discovery in
Pulsar. The Sequoyah team was on the call, as was Jon from RIM. We
discussed the options and agreed that this solution is the safest path.
The Pulsar package does not currently build against Helios. We need to get the
Pulsar package building and operational before Friday's M6 milestone, so
Eldorado volunteered the effort. They proposed a plan that will get the
package working using the existing p2 connector with the Helios APIs. As of
today, they've implemented the changes, tested them, and have them in a branch,
ready to integrate into the main trunk. The Mylyn connector strategy is the
right choice for the future, but without anyone committed to the effort, it
will have to wait until Helios SR1.
If anyone has issues with this plan, please respond ASAP.
-E
_______________________________________________
mobile-iwg mailing list
mobile-iwg@xxxxxxxxxxx <http://mobile-iwg@xxxxxxxxxxx>
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/mobile-iwg
_______________________________________________
sequoyah-dev mailing list
sequoyah-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/sequoyah-dev
_______________________________________________
mobile-iwg mailing list
mobile-iwg@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/mobile-iwg