Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
[stp-dev] IRC transcript

[12:02] cctrieloff: I will start in 2 minutes
[12:03] *** gblondelle has joined #eclipseSTP.
[12:04] cctrieloff: Topics for today are build system/setup / web site / and code contributions
[12:04] cctrieloff: does anyone want to add topics?
[12:04] cctrieloff: before we start?
[12:04] cctrieloff: topics good?
[12:05] Karlr: yep
[12:05] cctrieloff: ok
[12:05] cctrieloff: so we have two proposal that look good for build system
[12:05] DavidBosschaert: Which ones?
[12:06] cctrieloff: has everyone looked at the post from Naci ( he suggests to model it after the WTP build system)
[12:06] cctrieloff: and then the proposal from Adrian that is the IONA eclipse build system
[12:06] Karlr: I have looked at them
[12:06] cctrieloff: thoughts?
[12:07] Karlr: I am rather like the WTP model so far
[12:07] Karlr: :-) I rather like the WTP model I mean
[12:07] DavidBosschaert: Does the WTP one support automated build&test and coverage figures?
[12:07] cctrieloff: I liked the way WTP the dir structure but the IONA seems stronger on the auto build and test
[12:07] Karlr: auto build and test, yes, not sure about coverage - carl ?
[12:08] DavidBosschaert: Coverage is generally not that hard to add, as long as the basis is strong and doesn't require any manual intervention during the process.
[12:08] cctrieloff: My thoughts is to get Adrian to work with Naci and put one up as a combo of these two
[12:08] Karlr: That sounds like a good idea
[12:09] alainow: That sounds good
[12:09] alainow: I can ask Naci too for coverage ?
[12:10] *** RobCernich has joined #eclipseSTP.
[12:10] cctrieloff: then Naci says there is a machine that WTP uses to build that we can start on
[12:11] cctrieloff: I vote that we go ahead with that for now.
[12:11] cctrieloff: All in favor of that ?
[12:11] alainow: ok for me
[12:11] DavidBosschaert: Sounds great!
[12:11] jrohn: Sounds good.
[12:11] Karlr: yep for me
[12:12] cctrieloff: ok - then as of this IRC 1. we will give Adrian and Naci the go to set up the build  2. we will start doing builds on the WTP build machine
[12:14] cctrieloff: next
[12:14] cctrieloff: sorry for the delay I am talking to Speh from Scapa on the bridge to help get him on
[12:14] cctrieloff: web site topic --
[12:15] cctrieloff: What I have done is put up the project page and the charter
[12:15] cctrieloff: Comments on site so far ?
[12:16] cctrieloff: ok none I guess
[12:16] Karlr: I like it
[12:16] DavidBosschaert: It needs more content :)
[12:17] cctrieloff: I will be posting content for development resources and deployment process
[12:17] Karlr: We need to work out the timeline for getting all of the detail up there
[12:17] *** oisin has joined #eclipseSTP.
[12:17] cctrieloff: this should go up later today
[12:18] cctrieloff: what I would like is all the committers to provide the blurb abot themselves photo etc for the committer page
[12:18] cctrieloff: also when they go up, if you find issues let me know
[12:19] cctrieloff: Karl item - context timeline
[12:19] cctrieloff: anyone want to help write some
[12:19] cctrieloff: Scapa says that they can move the content across from TPTP for B2J
[12:20] Karlr: Can we ask Intalio for the BPMN content ?
[12:20] cctrieloff: yes we should
[12:20] cctrieloff: I don't think Intallio is on the IRC
[12:21] cctrieloff: Scapa will also work to place the code contrib to STP
[12:22] cctrieloff: Karl - helping scapa connect one sec
[12:23] Karlr: Anyone any other thoughts on how to get contribution / content onto the web site ?
[12:23] Karlr: Ok we can work on that one.
[12:23] Karlr: Next topic - Code contributions
[12:24] Karlr: So far I know that there are contributions coming in from IONA, Sybase, Intalio, Scapa and I think IBM - right ?
[12:26] Karlr: Blimey has this IRC gone to sleep ?
[12:26] cctrieloff: yes
[12:26] Karlr: :-)
[12:26] cctrieloff: so Scapa will take a snap shot form TPTP with I will then place in contrib
[12:26] *** sdaume has joined #eclipseSTP.
[12:27] *** oisin has signed off IRC (Remote closed the connection).
[12:27] cctrieloff: so for the contributions, what is the process we want to use to move them to mainline
[12:27] Karlr: And the agreement is to move all contributions from source to contrib in a folder name that matches the target i.e. /contrib/org.eclipse.stp.core
[12:28] Karlr: Once in the contrib folder, all recfectoring needs to take place there
[12:28] Karlr: Then once ready for propagation to mainline, we need a code review to occur PRIOR to movement
[12:28] cctrieloff: are we going to refractor in contrib or on a branch of before commit to mainline
[12:28] cctrieloff: this affects the way we mange permissions
[12:29] cctrieloff: "manage"
[12:29] Karlr: Don't mind
[12:30] cctrieloff: I agree that we need to do code review prior to commit, but it might be easier for the refractor to happen on a branch of a project - else "everyone" has to have access to contrib
[12:30] cctrieloff: thoughts?
[12:30] Karlr: Sounds good to me
[12:31] alainow: good for me
[12:31] Karlr: We need to document this policy and post it on the web site btw
[12:31] sdaume: sounds good especially since i would expect the recapturing to be an ongoing process for quite a while
[12:32] cctrieloff: Any object to this process ?  code goes to contrib and then refractor on a branch, review has to happen before first commit of branch.
[12:32] RobCernich: i think we need to define "refactoring"
[12:33] cctrieloff: what do you mean?
[12:33] RobCernich: i see two types that need to occur
[12:33] cctrieloff: give some examples
[12:33] RobCernich: one, refractor initial contributions
[12:33] RobCernich: two, refractor existing code based on the evolution of the project
[12:33] RobCernich: so, the contrib folder would act as a staging area
[12:34] gblondelle: if I understand well, there will be basically no
[12:34] RobCernich: once accepted, it should be moved to a "mainline" folder and considered "production" ready
[12:34] gblondelle: ... changes to the contrib folder
[12:34] cctrieloff: agree - the initial refactor is to remove past issues/ stuff we don't want and refactor to fit architecture we want to integrate it
[12:34] DavidBosschaert: In addition we probably need to define coding guidelines. Some people have even suggested checkstyle.
[12:35] cctrieloff: yes to both
[12:35] DavidBosschaert: And minimal test coverage guidelines.
[12:35] DavidBosschaert: E.g. nothing below 75% gets to mainline.
[12:35] cctrieloff: we should have at least 70% test coverage on code to be able to check into mainline
[12:36] Karlr: How do we verify that ? are you going to be doing builds in contrib?
[12:36] DavidBosschaert: We need to think about this, the way this is done in IONA, a developer does a coverage run on his branch before merge and we trust him.
[12:37] cctrieloff: no, but one the build is placed on a branch it can be build and that build will create coverage number by definition
[12:37] DavidBosschaert: If (after the merge) it turns out not to be okay (from the nightlies)...
[12:37] cctrieloff: the coverage number also becomes "public" after the merge
[12:37] DavidBosschaert: ...we can always reprimand the developer ;)
[12:38] DavidBosschaert: And worst case revert the merge.
[12:38] cctrieloff: should we force a back out of the merge does not meet coverage - of just tar the offending party
[12:38] cctrieloff: wow - that killed the conversation
[12:39] Karlr: Thinking about it...
[12:39] gblondelle: In the process described here, who needs access to contrib?
[12:40] cctrieloff: ok - so we need someone to write up a proposal for contrib process to be reviewed and posted & we need someone to write up a proposal for the build process
[12:40] cctrieloff: - to gblondelle (everyone has read access, only the PMC has write) as the work happen on a branch of the subproject
[12:41] cctrieloff: this way we can control the contributions that come into STP as source - for legal IP audit for Eclipse
[12:42] cctrieloff: Karl - you still thinking or are you ok to action these?
[12:42] Karlr: Sorry, yes this sounds fine to me
[12:43] cctrieloff: ok - volunteers for contrib process & for check in process
[12:43] Karlr: I can do the contribution procedure notes
[12:43] cctrieloff: thanks
[12:44] cctrieloff: David - do you want to modify the WTP merge process with stuff we discussed?
[12:45] DavidBosschaert: That's fine. just point me at where I can find the WTP page.
[12:46] cctrieloff: http://www.eclipse.org/webtools/
[12:46] cctrieloff: click on development resources
[12:46] cctrieloff: they have a section on coding guidelines and committing to the project
[12:47] cctrieloff: any last topics for today?
[12:47] cctrieloff: ok - I'll post this to stp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
[12:47] Karlr: ok
[12:48] cctrieloff: hope to have build up for next week :-)
[12:48] Karlr: Do we have anything to build :-)
[12:48] cctrieloff: one last thing - do you want me to send a mail to the dev list after I have the next set of content up on the web site?
[12:48] Karlr: yep
[12:49] cctrieloff: ok
[12:49] cctrieloff: and we should have something to build soon
[12:49] RobCernich: Carl, could you also post an agenda prior to the meeting?
[12:50] cctrieloff: sure
[12:50] cctrieloff: let's do the following
[12:50] cctrieloff: if anyone wants to IRC on a topic - post that to the stp-dev
[12:50] cctrieloff: then I will set the agenda to be all the posted topics fro IRC from the last week
[12:51] Karlr: sounds good
[12:51] cctrieloff: I don't need to set the agenda - the idea of IRC is to be able to have faster decision making for STP once a week
[12:52] cctrieloff: we can even do code hacks in the IRC time slot if needed
Carl Trieloff

----------------------------------------------------
200 West Street

Waltham, MA 02451 , USA

Tel: +1.781.902.8525

Cell: +1.781. 354.4502

Fax: +1.781.902.8001

----------------------------------------------------
Making Software Work Together TM

 

Back to the top