Igor,
I'm sorry, but I am having a hard time following this whole email trail
- it's just too confusing for someone who was not involved in the
process. Thus before the Technology PMC can approve, I need you to send
another email to us with just a summary of the current situation. Some
specific questions that need answering:
Igor Vinnykov wrote:
Main project home will be at
eclipse.org, where we will create an update site, which join all
Subversive
features - all required and optional, located at eclipse.org and
polarion.org. This
configuration will be correctly described by special notice on the
project
page.
I can read this statement is a number of ways - please clarify which is
correct:
- The update site site.xml located at eclipse.org contain
references to features (via the <feature url=""> tag) that are
located at eclipse.org AND features (<feature url=""> tag)
that are located at polarion.org. Thus someone who is installing
Subversive via the Eclipse update manager only needs to select the
"Subversive" feature in the list and then click "select required" and
then everything (including the polarion.org hosted features) is
automatically installed.
- The update site site.xml located at eclipse.org contains only
references to features (<feature url=""> tag) that are located
at eclipse.org. A second update site site.xml located at polarion.org
contains references to features (<feature url=""> tag) that
are located at polarion.org. Thus someone who is installing Subversive
via the Eclipse update manager needs to use both update sites to
install the features.
- Something else entirely... ?
According to this
proposal, an update site, which will be located at eclipse.org, include
following features:
Required
features:
SVN
Team Provider –Subversive
core implementation. Feature and its source code are located at eclipse.org.
Source code doesn’t have dependencies, which violate Eclipse guidelines.
I'm hoping that this second sentence is a typo and that you really
mean: "This source code does not have dependencies which violate the
Eclipse IP Policy." Unfortunately, the way the sentence currently
reads is "This source code does not have any dependencies and this
(lack of dependencies) violates the Eclipse IP Policy."
Optional
features:
Subversion clients (installation
of one of the following Subversion clients is required):
So if "installation of one of the following clients is required" then
how are they optional features? It seems like they are required
features, right?
Another topic, which I
want to discuss related with main goal for Subversive project. As we
defined in
our proposal, the main goal for Subversive is future inclusion into
Eclipse
distribution. At the current moment we identified problem related with
licenses
for Subversion client libraries, because none of them are compatible
with Eclipse
guidelines, which means that project can’t be included into the
distribution. What you recommend to do? What is your vision for this
topic?
Clearly you need to find an SVN client implementation that is license
compatible. Either by convincing one of the existing implementations to
dual license under a compatible license or by re-implementing a client
library under EPL.
- Bjorn
|
