Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [tm-dev] TM Terminal 3.6 maintenance

Hi,

IMO, the release should be somehow reflected by the feature version ID's. Plug-in's should uprev only if they change. Look at Eclipse platform itself, only for the top features, o.e.platform or o.e.sdk or o.e.epp.package.*, you can identify if it is an Eclipse 4.3.2 or Eclipse 4.4 or whatever. There are many plug-in's and sub features that have a total different version id. In example o.e.ecf is a part of the Eclipse platform, but the version ID is currently 1.1.0 for Eclipse 4.4.

What I never understood for TM Terminal in particular is the "randomness" of the TM Terminal top features and the associated release. For TM Terminal 3.6, for the SDK and the Core SDK feature (without the deprecated "Terminal" view), we do have the version ID 3.3.301. If you install the non SDK features, the TM Terminal (Widget) feature has the version ID 3.2.301. I always desired to clean up the TM Terminal feature structure and to get the feature versions in sync with the release version, but I reserved this task for the time we create a TM Terminal 4.0, with a new home, a new name space, cleaned up feature structure etc. We cannot change what we have, except probably the version IDs, for TM Terminal 3.x.

Just my 2 cents.

Best regards, Uwe :)




> -----Original Message-----
> From: tm-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:tm-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On
> Behalf Of Doug Schaefer
> Sent: Donnerstag, 17. Juli 2014 00:15
> To: Greg Watson; Oberhuber, Martin
> Cc: TM project developer discussions
> Subject: Re: [tm-dev] TM Terminal 3.6 maintenance
> 
> I'm planning on switching the CDT to use the JGIT provider. Why force the user
> to download plugins if they don't change let alone the needless load on the
> eclipse ‎servers.
> 
> Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone on the Rogers network.
>   Original Message
> From: Greg Watson
> Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2014 3:07 PM
> To: Oberhuber, Martin
> Reply To: TM project developer discussions
> Cc: TM project developer discussions
> Subject: Re: [tm-dev] TM Terminal 3.6 maintenance
> 
> 
> If I was downloading a 3.6.1 release then I'd expect the files to be named 3.6.1
> or 3.6 not 3.6.0. But that's just how we do it in PTP.
> 
> Greg
> 
> > On Jul 16, 2014, at 2:48 PM, "Oberhuber, Martin"
> <Martin.Oberhuber@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > If there's no change affecting rseserver, why would you uprev them ?
> >
> > One advantage of jgit qualifiers is, that it's relatively easy to determine if a
> change went into a particular bundle or not (ie qualifier differs compared to
> released version).
> > This helps doing a "late uprev" of bundles / features only at the time
> > an actual change went in; I've used this in the past for some shellscripts to
> alert about "missing bundle uprev".
> >
> > But I'm not a releng guy by any stretch, and I have no strong opinion here.
> > CDT seems to be going a much easier route with early uprev and build-date-
> qualifiers.
> > For me personally, anything is fine here.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Martin
> > --
> > Martin Oberhuber, SMTS / Product Owner - Development Tools, Wind River
> > direct +43.662.457915.85  fax +43.662.457915.6
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Greg Watson [mailto:g.watson@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
> > Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2014 7:38 PM
> > To: Anna Dushistova
> > Cc: TM project developer discussions; Stieber, Uwe; Oberhuber, Martin
> > Subject: Re: [tm-dev] TM Terminal 3.6 maintenance
> >
> > Ok, but shouldn't the latest rseserver components be 3.6.1 not 3.6.0?
> >
> > Greg
> >
> >> On Jul 16, 2014, at 12:57 PM, Anna Dushistova
> <anna.dushistova@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>
> >> We are using jgit qualifiers, so it corresponds to the date of the last change.
> >>
> >>> On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 6:22 PM, Greg Watson <g.watson@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
> >>> Hi Martin,
> >>>
> >>> I've created bugzilla versions/milestones for 3.6.2 and 3.7.
> >>>
> >>> Before I promote the build, I have a couple of questions for everyone about
> the feature/plugin versions for the build. In past releases (and in other projects
> I'm involved in) the feature version numbers are usually the release version.
> However this no longer seems to be the case. Also, the version qualifier
> normally corresponds to the build date but this is not the case either. Is there
> any reason for this?
> >>>
> >>> Regards,
> >>> Greg
> >>>
> >>>> On Jul 16, 2014, at 9:09 AM, Oberhuber, Martin
> <Martin.Oberhuber@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Hi Uwe,
> >>>>
> >>>> The 20140704 on 3.6maintenance _is_ from build #5 -- I've decided to
> keep the folder name unchanged since I had (prematurely) already published it
> on Bugzilla.
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks,
> >>>> Martin
> >>>> --
> >>>> Martin Oberhuber, SMTS / Product Owner - Development Tools, Wind
> >>>> River direct +43.662.457915.85  fax +43.662.457915.6
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> -----Original Message-----
> >>>> From: Stieber, Uwe
> >>>> Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2014 1:20 PM
> >>>> To: Oberhuber, Martin; Anna Dushistova
> >>>> Cc: Greg Watson <g.watson@xxxxxxxxxxxx> (g.watson@xxxxxxxxxxxx)
> >>>> Subject: RE: FW: [tm-dev] TM Terminal 3.6 maintenance
> >>>>
> >>>> Hi Martin,
> >>>>
> >>>> The site http://download.eclipse.org/tm/updates/3.6milestones contains
> only the build of 20140704, but not build #5
> (https://hudson.eclipse.org/tm/job/tm-3.6-maintenance/5/) from 20140715.
> This one is signed. Can you publish the 20140715 build to the update site
> please?
> >>>>
> >>>>> - How to deal with the incorrect (3.5) versions of rseserver and
> category.xml ?
> >>>>
> >>>> If I'm not mistaken, Anna fixed the rseserver [1] version in master.
> Category.xml is fixed in both master and maintenance branch [2].
> >>>>
> >>>> Best regards, Uwe :)
> >>>>
> >>>> [1]
> >>>> http://git.eclipse.org/c/tm/org.eclipse.tm.git/commit/?id=4666ad510
> >>>> c
> >>>> 11a5927adb83cdeb7cb46ddb12d89e [2]
> >>>> http://git.eclipse.org/c/tm/org.eclipse.tm.git/diff/releng/org.ecli
> >>>> p
> >>>>
> se.tm.repo/category.xml?h=TM_3.6_maintenance&id=b39192046ebb57db07a
> >>>> d
> >>>> 2f57011dc402c54e8e16
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> -----Original Message-----
> >>>>> From: Oberhuber, Martin
> >>>>> Sent: Mittwoch, 16. Juli 2014 11:47
> >>>>> To: Stieber, Uwe; Anna Dushistova
> >>>>> Cc: Greg Watson <g.watson@xxxxxxxxxxxx> (g.watson@xxxxxxxxxxxx)
> >>>>> Subject: RE: FW: [tm-dev] TM Terminal 3.6 maintenance
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Hi Uwe,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I've update 3.6maintenance already yesterday.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Remaining questions to Greg:
> >>>>> - Can the updates/3.6 site hold the fix ?
> >>>>> - What about new target milestones in bugzilla ?
> >>>>> - How to deal with the incorrect (3.5) versions of rseserver and
> category.xml ?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Thanks,
> >>>>> Martin
> >>>>> --
> >>>>> Martin Oberhuber, SMTS / Product Owner - Development Tools, Wind
> >>>>> River direct +43.662.457915.85  fax +43.662.457915.6
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> -----Original Message-----
> >>>>> From: Stieber, Uwe
> >>>>> Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2014 7:51 AM
> >>>>> To: Anna Dushistova; Oberhuber, Martin
> >>>>> Cc: Greg Watson <g.watson@xxxxxxxxxxxx> (g.watson@xxxxxxxxxxxx)
> >>>>> Subject: RE: FW: [tm-dev] TM Terminal 3.6 maintenance
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Thanks Anna.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> @Martin: Would you mind to update the 3.6milestones update site
> >>>>> with the new build?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Thanks, Best regards, Uwe :)
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> -----Original Message-----
> >>>>>> From: Anna Dushistova [mailto:anna.dushistova@xxxxxxxxx]
> >>>>>> Sent: Dienstag, 15. Juli 2014 19:24
> >>>>>> To: Oberhuber, Martin
> >>>>>> Cc: Greg Watson <g.watson@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> (g.watson@xxxxxxxxxxxx);
> >>>>>> Stieber, Uwe
> >>>>>> Subject: Re: FW: [tm-dev] TM Terminal 3.6 maintenance
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Martin,
> >>>>>> The running 3.6-maintenance build should be signed.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Anna.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 6:50 PM, Oberhuber, Martin
> >>>>>> <Martin.Oberhuber@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>>>>>> Hi Greg,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Quick reminder about the issue below.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Thanks to Uwe, we have a working TM maintenance build:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> https://hudson.eclipse.org/tm/job/tm-3.6-maintenance/
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> But the artifacts currently aren't signed . Uwe / Anna, can you
> >>>>>>> get them signed and rebuild ?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I would like to get a first maintenance build published on the
> >>>>>>> http://download.eclipse.org/tm/updates/3.6 site if that's OK for
> >>>>>>> you, because it fixes a severe issue with Eclipse Dark Theme
> >>>>>>> that has been reported multiple times now:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=438175
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> For now, I've published the (unsigned) update on the TM milestones
> site:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> http://download.eclipse.org/tm/updates/3.6milestones/20140704
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> BTW, I have also added a TM "Target Milestone" 3.6.1 - Greg you
> >>>>>>> may want to add target milestones for 3.6.2 and 3.7* at some point ?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I also noticed that on the tm/3.6/GA site, the "rseserver" is
> >>>>>>> still published with a wrong version (3.5 but it's really 3.6)
> >>>>>>> and also the "Categories" were incorrectly released at GA
> >>>>>>> (saying
> >>>>>>> 3.5 when it's really 3.6). These could probably be fixed up also
> >>>>>>> with submitting a
> >>>>>> "20140704"
> >>>>>>> sibling of the TM update site and probably hiding the "GA" bits
> >>>>>>> in the composite . what do you think ?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Thanks,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Martin
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Martin Oberhuber, SMTS / Product Owner - Development Tools, Wind
> >>>>>>> River
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> direct +43.662.457915.85  fax +43.662.457915.6
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> From: tm-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
> >>>>>>> [mailto:tm-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx]
> >>>>>>> On Behalf Of Stieber, Uwe
> >>>>>>> Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2014 10:32 AM
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> To: TM project developer discussions
> >>>>>>> Subject: Re: [tm-dev] TM Terminal 3.6 maintenance
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Hi Martin,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Uwe: With the first commits into TM Terminal master and
> >>>>>>>> TM_3.6_maintenance  respectively, shouldn't the versions on the
> >>>>>>>> bundles be updated [before
> >>>>>>>>> publishing on an update site] ?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Yes, they should. Will do it in a minute.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Best regards, Uwe
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Uwe Stieber, Senior Member of Technical Staff - Sys, Wind River
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> direct +43 662 457915 0 fax +43 662 457915 6
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> From: tm-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
> >>>>>>> [mailto:tm-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx]
> >>>>>>> On Behalf Of Oberhuber, Martin
> >>>>>>> Sent: Donnerstag, 03. Juli 2014 10:21
> >>>>>>> To: TM project developer discussions
> >>>>>>> Subject: Re: [tm-dev] TM Terminal 3.6 maintenance
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Thanks Uwe !
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Greg, I guess the highest priority fix here is this one:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> http://git.eclipse.org/c/tm/org.eclipse.tm.git/commit/?h=TM_3.6_
> >>>>>>> m a in te nance&id=dbea06a2503ff3567e2e178bb621beac1f8ca5ca
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> This bug has widespread consequences on multiple packages, and
> >>>>>>> makes using the "Dark Theme" almost impossible.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I think it would be good if we could release this to the public
> >>>>>>> TM
> >>>>>>> 3.6 update site. Then we could tell people to just "update" the
> >>>>>>> TM Terminal to fix the problem.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I'd suggest making the TM 3.6 update site a composite and add a
> >>>>>>> sibling built off the branch.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Could you do that ?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Uwe: With the first commits into TM Terminal master and
> >>>>>>> TM_3.6_maintenance respectively, shouldn't the versions on the
> >>>>>>> bundles be updated [before publishing on an update site] ?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Thanks,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Martin
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Martin Oberhuber, SMTS / Product Owner - Development Tools, Wind
> >>>>>>> River
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> direct +43.662.457915.85  fax +43.662.457915.6
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> From: tm-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
> >>>>>>> [mailto:tm-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx]
> >>>>>>> On Behalf Of Stieber, Uwe
> >>>>>>> Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2014 8:30 AM
> >>>>>>> To: TM project developer discussions
> >>>>>>> Subject: Re: [tm-dev] TM Terminal 3.6 maintenance
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Hi Greg,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> It's done, but note that I had to name the branch
> >>>>>>> "TM_3.6_maintenance", following the example of
> >>>>>>> "TM_3.5_maintenance", as there is a "R3_6_maintenance" branch
> >>>>>>> already, but this one is more than 5
> >>>>>> years old.
> >>>>>>> The same is true for "R3_5_maintenance". Guess it had been the
> >>>>>>> reason to switch to the "TM_<n>_maintenance" schema.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> The corresponding Jenkins job is "tm-3.6-maintenance". See
> >>>>>>> https://hudson.eclipse.org/tm/job/tm-3.6-maintenance/. No auto
> >>>>>>> publishing of the resulting P2 repository (same as for
> >>>>>>> "tm-3.5-maintenance"). If you desire to have auto publishing for
> >>>>>>> the maintenance builds in place, please talk to Anna, who is
> >>>>>>> maintaining the pom
> >>>>>> files for the TM project.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Best regards, Uwe J
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> From: tm-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
> >>>>>>> [mailto:tm-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx]
> >>>>>>> On Behalf Of Greg Watson
> >>>>>>> Sent: Mittwoch, 02. Juli 2014 14:08
> >>>>>>> To: TM project developer discussions
> >>>>>>> Subject: Re: [tm-dev] TM Terminal 3.6 maintenance
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Hi Uwe,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Sounds fine to me.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Regards,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Greg
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On Jul 2, 2014, at 3:28 AM, Stieber, Uwe
> >>>>>>> <Uwe.Stieber@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Hi Greg,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I have some bugfixes and small enhancements in the pipe for the
> >>>>>>> TM Terminal
> >>>>>>> 3.6 stream. For the moment, there is only a tag (R3_6) but no branch.
> >>>>>>> If you don't object I will go and create the "R3_6_maintenance"
> >>>>>>> branch based on your tag and will cherry pick the fixes from the
> >>>>>>> master branch. The master will lead to TM Terminal 3.7. Once it
> >>>>>>> is time to provide drops for the Luna service release, we
> >>>>>>> definitely need to deliver a new TM Terminal 3.6 build from the
> >>>>>>> maintenance branch to that
> >>>>>> Luna service release.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Any comments?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Thanks, Best regards, Uwe J
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>>>> tm-dev mailing list
> >>>>>>> tm-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> >>>>>>> To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or
> >>>>>>> unsubscribe from this list, visit
> >>>>>>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/tm-dev
> >
> _______________________________________________
> tm-dev mailing list
> tm-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from
> this list, visit https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/tm-dev
> _______________________________________________
> tm-dev mailing list
> tm-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from
> this list, visit https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/tm-dev


Back to the top