Re: [tm-dev] Master branch is TM 3.7?

["Stieber, Uwe" <Uwe.Stieber@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

>I looked at the Target Explorer when considering a Targets View for the LaunchBar and found it to be too flexible and too hard to extend.

Well, you cannot request being able to contribute into the tree hierarchy at every level from everywhere on the one hand and complain about the flexibility it gives you on the other hand! I bed you never considered writing up your own projects view because the Eclipse Project Explorer is too flexible. The API and the way to extend the Project Explorer and the System Management view is exactly the same.

Nevermind. I'm just hoping that you do make the "Target View" pluggable for vendors bundling CDT but having different needs once it comes to target management ... hope dies last.

Let's return to where we started from, which is bugzilla #440782. The original trigger of this discussion is that there are a) too much terminal views in Eclipse and b) 2 out of the 3 available views are outdated and no longer maintained. These points are of technical nature and are planned to be resolved by the TM 3.7 release.

After the TM 3.7 release, the Terminal widget will likely be moved to another project home as the remaining Terminal widget committers are from the TCF project. If or if not there will be further releases of the RSE parts from the master or maintenance branches, that's up to Greg and David McKnight to decide. David already expressed his interest in keeping the project around, even if he will be the only active committer left on RSE if the Terminal widget moved out.

Everything else is politics and I'm not a politician ... so please let's focus on #440782 here.

Best regards, Uwe

[1] https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=440782


> -----Original Message-----
> From: tm-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:tm-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On
> Behalf Of Doug Schaefer
> Sent: Dienstag, 25. November 2014 20:13
> To: TM project developer discussions; Michael Scharf
> Subject: Re: [tm-dev] Master branch is TM 3.7?
> 
> OK, here we go. I looked at the Target Explorer when considering a Targets
> View for the LaunchBar and found it to be too flexible and too hard to extend. I
> didn’t see what it bought me over the standard jface Content/Label providers.
> As such, I have created my own Targets View for the launch bar and will be
> adding things like file and process browsers to it. This will be another
> alternative to replace RSE with the advantage of being tied nicely to the launch
> bar for Remote launches.
> 
> You can see this work in the CDT launch bar plug-ins and the Arduino IDE I am
> building out at github.com/dschaefer/wascana. More when I make more
> progress there.
> 
> Note that this is all towards my work on supporting remote launches in the CDT
> using the org.eclipse.remote plug-ins and the jsch stuff in particular. This is
> something CDT should have had a long time ago. And with the LaunchBar
> making it easy to add remote targets and then co-ordinating launch
> configurations to launch for them, it’s time. I am working to get this done by
> the 8.6 CDT release in February.
> 
> Doug.
> 
> On 2014-11-25, 4:22 AM, "Stieber, Uwe" <Uwe.Stieber@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> >Hi,
> >
> >> After having written a fair bit of code that extends RSE I do
> >>certainly agree with  others that it is not an ideal model, and so I
> >>am also interested in what a  migration path looks like and would be
> >>interested in contributing work there.
> >> Like Uwe said in another follow on, maybe that looks like adding the
> >>SSH/SFTP  to Target Explorer or something.  In practice our usage has
> >>tended to mash-up  different underlying technologies on one
> >>connection.  In effect we are using  SSH/SFTP for file system access
> >>and the terminal as well as the ability to spawn  remote processes and
> >>redirect stdio.  Then we additionally use unrelated web  services on
> >>the same target to provide other objects in the tree (e.g.
> >>power on
> >> a VM, etc.).  So all that to say, a more flexible model in the tree
> >>would be
> >> great.   I know very little about it, but it does appear that the new
> >> org.eclipse.remote API provides much of what we need minus a
> >>terminal, but I  am not sure how that fits into an "explorer" view of
> >>one flavor or another.
> >
> >The "Target Explorer" had been designed with most possible flexibility
> >and extentability in mind. In fact, the "System Management" view, which
> >is Target Explorer equivalent to the "Remote Systems" view, is simply
> >an instantiation of the Eclipse Common Navigator framework. You have
> >the total flexibility and contribution possibilities of a Common Navigator.
> >If you have ever done a contribution into the Eclipse Project Explorer,
> >you can do a contribution into the "System Management" view too. You
> >basically have the full control of all the views content right from the
> >root nodes.
> >
> >Right now, we do have a core Target Explorer + very complete TCF based
> >extensions for remote filesystem browsing and editing, remote process
> >launch and monitoring and debugging. The TCF project also hosts the new
> >"Terminals" view bringing a lot of always asked for enhancements, like
> >the support for local terminals on both Unix and Windows. This new
> >"Terminals" view is the only maintained one and should be included in
> >all packages and offerings used to include the outdated "Terminal" or
> >"RSE Terminals" views. And the effort to get there is basically what
> >triggered the thread here.
> >
> >What we would like to see is a core Target Explorer +
> >org.eclipse.remote based extensions for SSH/SFTP remote filesystem
> >browsing and editing as well as remote process launching an monitoring.
> >That's definitly the most desired contribution we would be very exited to see
> happening.
> >
> >Best regards, Uwe :)
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: tm-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:tm-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx]
> >> On Behalf Of Aaron Spear
> >> Sent: Montag, 24. November 2014 18:03
> >> To: TM project developer discussions; Michael Scharf
> >> Subject: Re: [tm-dev] Master branch is TM 3.7?
> >>
> >> Hi again Doug et all,
> >>
> >> Yes, certainly many are enjoying the fruit of the TM committers
> >>vision and  labor, and we owe you all a very big debt of gratitude.
> >>Thanks for your  seemingly endless enthusiasm, energy and commitment
> >>to making great  software.  I do of course agree that it is not
> >>reasonable for my company or  anyone else to expect you all to
> >>continue to maintain RSE out of the goodness  of your heart (however
> >>good it may be, there is only so much a human can do!)
> >>
> >> Assuming that we or others with a vested interest are willing to step
> >>up and  help, what would that look like?  It would appear that anyone
> >>that is going to  help is not likely to be a current committer on the
> >>project since as you said  there is no one left to do this.  I am not
> >>sure how that would work to have  myself or someone else from VMware
> >>or Redhat etc. to jump in for  maintenance for the next release
> >>perhaps?
> >>
> >> After having written a fair bit of code that extends RSE I do
> >>certainly agree with  others that it is not an ideal model, and so I
> >>am also interested in what a  migration path looks like and would be
> >>interested in contributing work there.
> >> Like Uwe said in another follow on, maybe that looks like adding the
> >>SSH/SFTP  to Target Explorer or something.  In practice our usage has
> >>tended to mash-up  different underlying technologies on one
> >>connection.  In effect we are using  SSH/SFTP for file system access
> >>and the terminal as well as the ability to spawn  remote processes and
> >>redirect stdio.  Then we additionally use unrelated web  services on
> >>the same target to provide other objects in the tree (e.g.
> >>power on
> >> a VM, etc.).  So all that to say, a more flexible model in the tree
> >>would be
> >> great.   I know very little about it, but it does appear that the new
> >> org.eclipse.remote API provides much of what we need minus a
> >>terminal, but I  am not sure how that fits into an "explorer" view of
> >>one flavor or another.
> >>
> >> thanks again,
> >> Aaron
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: tm-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:tm-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx]
> >> On Behalf Of Doug Schaefer
> >> Sent: Friday, November 21, 2014 8:22 PM
> >> To: TM project developer discussions; Michael Scharf
> >> Subject: Re: [tm-dev] Master branch is TM 3.7?
> >>
> >> Hi Aaron, good to hear from you again. I’m glad that Vmware, and
> >>othercompanies, are enjoying the fruits of the hard work that the RSE
> >>team  hasput in over the years. But as I’m sure you’re aware, these
> >>haven’t  beencharitable donations, and those who have contributed are
> >>now gone.
> >> Theresno one left to do this for you. If you and others want it
> >>alive, you needto  step up and invest in it.Doug.On 2014-11-21, 7:30
> >>PM, "Aaron Spear"
> >> <aspear@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:>Hi TM friends,>>I am a little unclear on
> >>what  is being proposed here, but it sure looks>like you are talking
> >>about a possible  end of life for RSE as we know it?>>I think you
> >>would probably be surprised just  how many companies and>others are
> >>using RSE downstream.  VMware for  instance is using it for>file
> >>system, terminals, and other custom services for a  number
> >>of>developer SDK's targeting our main products (including ESX
> >>hypervisor,>vCenter, vCenter Orchestrator and others).  We actually
> >>have a
> >> subsystem>and such to support connecting to Windows boxes using CIFS
> >>that
> >> we were>thinking about contributing.  RSE certainly has its warts,
> >>but it
> >> still>has a place in our product lines and VMware would like to keep
> >> still>it
> >>around.>
> >> I suspect there are other companies in this camp too.  Heck I find
> >>it>generally
> >> useful to have around while I am doing web development so that>I can
> >>easily  edit remote configuration files in my local
> >>eclipse>seamlessly.>>Are you  looking for new blood to jump in and
> >>maintain it?>>best regards,>Aaron Spear,
> >> VMware>>>-----Original Message----->From: tm-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
> >> [mailto:tm-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On>Behalf Of Doug Schaefer>Sent:
> >> Thursday, November 13, 2014 9:13 AM>To: Michael Scharf; TM project
> >> developer discussions>Subject: Re: [tm-dev] Master branch is TM
> >> 3.7?>>We quickly discussed this on the architecture council call and
> >> it
> >>appears>there are
> >> commits happening, but it¹s not being picked up by the portal>at the
> >>moment.
> >> So it¹s not quite dead yet :). But certainly at issue.>>Doug.>>On
> >>2014-11-13,
> >> 11:10 AM, "Michael Scharf" <eclipse@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:>>>+1 let it die
> >>unless  someone steps up...>>>>Michael>>>>On 2014-11-13 15:52, Greg
> >>Watson  wrote:>>> I¹m fine with this if we have everyone¹s agreement.
> >>Committers on
> >> the>>>project are:>>>>>> € Anna Dushistova>>> € David McKnight>>> €
> >> the>>>Greg
> >> Watson>>> € Kevin Doyle>>> € Martin Oberhuber>>> € Michael Scharf>>>
> >> Watson>>> €
> >> Uwe Stieber>>>>>> Assuming Martin and Uwe have already agreed, I¹d
> >>like to  have a +1>>>from Anna, David, Kevin, and Michael before
> >>proceeding. I don¹t
> >> think>>>we can proceed unless we have at least a majority of
> >> think>>>committers
> >> voting>>>+1.>>>>>> If we go ahead with archiving TM, I suggest we use
> >>Luna
> >> SR2 for the>>>final release and withdraw from Mars.>>>>>> Here¹s a
> >>summary:>>>>>> 1. Announce TM change proposal to cross-project a.
> >>Final  release of>>> TM 3.7 with Luna SR2 b. TM to withdraw from Mars 2.
> >> Agreement from>>> TCF project to host Terminal 3. Approval from PMC
> >>for
> >> restructuring>>> review 4. Restructuring review to move Terminal to
> >> restructuring>>> TCF
> >>5.
> >> Approval>>> from PMC for termination review 6. Termination review 7.
> >> Approval>>> TM
> >> is>>> archived>>>>>> Is this agreed? Anybody not in agreement?>>>>>>
> >> Thanks,>>> Greg>>>>>>>>>>>> On Nov 13, 2014, at 6:13 AM, Oberhuber,
> >>
> Martin>>><Martin.Oberhuber@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>>><mailto:Martin.Oberhuber@
> >> windriver.com>>>>>wrote:>>>>>>> Ok.>>>> If the plan of archiving TM
> >>solidifies, we¹ll need to inform>>>>cross-project about that.>>>> Greg
> >>are you  going to do that ?>>>> I could imagine that there will be a
> >>couple downstream  projects who>>>>won¹t be happy about TM being
> >>archived, so better announce  early.>>>> 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>>>>>[mailto:tm-
> >> dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx]*On Behalf Of*Stieber,
> >>Uwe>>>>*Sent:*Thursday,  November 13, 2014 9:25 AM  *To:*TM project
> >>developer>>>>discussions>>>>
> >> *Subject:*Re: [tm-dev] Master branch is TM 3.7?>>>> Hi Martin,>>>>
> >>Sounds  like a plan to me.>>>> Best regards, UweJ>>>> *From:*tm-dev-
> >> bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx>>>><mailto:tm-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx>[mailto:tm-
> >> dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx>>>>]*O>>>>n Behalf Of*Oberhuber, Martin>>>>
> >>*Sent:*Donnerstag, 13. November 2014 08:59  *To:*TM
> >>project>>>>developer
> >> discussions>>>> *Subject:*Re: [tm-dev] Master branch is TM 3.7?>>>>
> >> discussions>>>> So,
> >> following sounds like a plan:>>>> 1.Terminal is moved from TM to TCF
> >>(that¹s  where the active>>>>committers>>>>are)>>>> 2.We need one more
> >>release of  TM (Luna SR2 or Mars) such that we can>>>>clean up the
> >>dependencies on the  Terminal  3.After that, TM can be>>>>archived as
> >>a project.>>>> Do the  committers agree ?>>>> 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>[mailto:tm-
> >> dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx>>>>]*O>>>>n Behalf Of*Stieber, Uwe>>>>
> >> *Sent:*Thursday, November 13, 2014 8:03 AM  *To:*TM
> >> project>>>>developer
> >> discussions>>>> *Subject:*Re: [tm-dev] Master branch is TM 3.7?>>>>
> >> discussions>>>> Hi
> >> Greg,>>>> Well, I can speak only for Terminal and the Terminal is
> >> definitely>>>>under active development. There might be just 2 active
> >> committers>>>>left, myself and Martin Oberhuber from time to time,
> >> committers>>>>but
> >>we
> >> still do>>>>changes and we still need releases.>>>> I would be OK to
> >>move out  the Terminal from the TM project but the>>>>proposed common
> >>project where  things like the Terminal could live>>>>does not exist
> >>yet. I¹m also fine with  moving the Terminal widget to>>>>the TCF
> >>project container, but  that¹s  something Martin Oberhuber>>>>needs to
> >>decide.>>>> For the Terminal, the  main complains are not necessarily
> >>bugs at>>>>this point of time, the main  complains are about the fact
> >>that you do>>>>have multiple Terminal views in  Eclipse once RSE is
> >>installed. 2>>>>views are at least deprecated and only  the
> >>³Terminals² view provided>>>>from the TCF project is maintained and
> >>where  new features requested>>>>by the users are added. We have to
> >>get
> >>the>>>>2
> >> other Terminal views out of Eclipse to stop the user confusion.
> >>The>>>>plan for
> >> doing this is  outlined below, but this work does have some>>>>effect
> >>on EPP  packages. I can do everything outlined below, but I>>>>don¹t
> >>know how to get  the EPP packages updated to include the
> >>correct>>>>features.>>>> The cleanup  of the multiple Terminal views
> >>should happen for the>>>>Mars release.>>>>  Regarding the committer
> >>meetings, at least for me time is limited>>>>and  discussing things
> >>here instead of a shared conference call is>>>>easier to  manage.>>>>
> >>Thanks, Best regards, UweJ>>>> *From:*tm-dev-
> >> bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx>>>><mailto:tm-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx>[mailto:tm-
> >> dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx>>>>]*O>>>>n Behalf Of*Greg Watson>>>>
> >>*Sent:*Mittwoch, 12. November 2014 23:01  *To:*TM project
> >> developer>>>>discussions>>>> *Subject:*Re: [tm-dev] Master branch is
> >> developer>>>>discussions>>>> TM
> >> 3.7?>>>> Hi Uwe,>>>> I¹m not sure of the plans at this point. I¹ve
> >>asked this list
> >> about>>>>the 3.6 version a couple of times but received no reply.
> >> about>>>>I¹ve
> >> also>>>>invited everyone to the PTP developers conference call to
> >> discuss>>>>plans, but no one from TM ever  attended. At this point,
> >> discuss>>>>I¹m
> >> assuming>>>>that the current release is the final release for TM.>>>>
> >>I¹m not a
> >> developer on the project, so I don¹t know what anyone¹s>>>>plans are
> >>unless  they let me know. Also, developer¹s will need to>>>>step up
> >>and update the  project plan, documentation, and anything else>>>>that
> >>needs to be done. I can  fix the  outline of the plan, but>>>>someone
> >>else will need to fill in the details.
> >> Finally, we need>>>>people to test the builds before they are
> >>released, or we  can¹t say>>>>we¹re meeting Eclipse quality. This
> >>didn¹t seem to be happening
> >> for>>>>the SR1 release.>>>> Regards,>>>> Greg>>>> On Oct 30, 2014, at
> >>5:43
> >> AM, Stieber, Uwe
> >> <Uwe.Stieber@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>>>><mailto:Uwe.Stieber@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>>
> >> wrote:>>>>>>>> Hi Greg,>>>> Can you confirm that I¹m right in
> >>assuming that  the master branch is>>>>leading to the TM 3.7 release?
> >>When will it be  released? I¹ve checked>>>>the TM project pages
> >>
> >>undereclipse.org/tm>>>><https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=htt
> >>p-
> >> 3A__eclipse.org_tm&d=A>>>>AIF-g&c=Sqcl0Ez6M0X8aeM67LKIiDJAXVeAw-
> >> YihVMNtXt-
> >>
> uEs&r=IoX6lQ05T8ggojuUJ>>>>t27Ff7wSZqFOe_BW7zihIF6LNA&m=g5KNm0_rR
> >> Dpsx8IAZTePBHXZbMdB1kZoo_V--
> >> 5hcjJ>>>>g&s=J15p7KqGXLIYotI2Ci3Ci_PI83Q9u9gs6TneSPJjhDk&e= >, but
> >> 5hcjJ>>>>this
> >> pages>>>>are not up to date.>>>> If master is leading to the 3.7
> >>release, I
> >> would like to change at>>>>least the TM Terminal feature version
> >>numbers  accordingly. Also I>>>>want to tackle a few Terminal related
> >>releasing issues  we keep>>>>pushing ahead of us for a long time
> >>now.>>>> Not sure if you need  to announce them in some project lead
> >>meeting.>>>> 1.Deprecation of unused  or no longer supported features
> >>a.Take out>>>>the o.e.tm.terminal.view and  the o.e.tm.terminal.local
> >>from the build>>>>and repositories  b.Move the  source of this
> >>features to>>>>terminal/deprecated folder to keep the source  around
> >>for reference>>>>c.Remove the o.e.tm.terminal.core.sdk feature as
> >>without the>>>>terminal.view feature, the usual SDK feature is the
> >>same as
> >> the>>>>core.sdk feature  2.Work on replacement for
> >> org.eclipse.rse.terminal>>>>feature  a.Remove this feature from the
> >>org.eclipse.rse feature>>>>b.Create an replacement providing the same
> >>entry  points from the RSE>>>>System Explorer as the
> >>org.eclipse.rse.terminal plug-in  does but use>>>>the newer and
> >>maintained TCF Terminals view. The new RSE
> >> terminal>>>>feature will be provided by the  TCF project like the TCF
> >>based
> >> file>>>>system and process RSE contributions.>>>> All effort is
> >> file>>>>related
> >>to
> >> address the many complains about having up>>>>to>>>>3 different
> >>terminals  views available in Eclipse. Final goal is to>>>>bundle all
> >>terminal related effort,  bugfixing and feature>>>>development, into
> >>the superior TCF  Terminals  view.>>>> Best regards, UweJ>>>>
> >>_______________________________________________>>>> tm-dev
> mailing
> >> list>>>> tm-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:tm-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>  To change
> >> your>>>>delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from
> >> this>>>>list, visit
> >>>>>>https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-
> >> 3A__dev.eclipse.org_>>>>mailman_listinfo_tm-2Ddev&d=AAIF-
> >> g&c=Sqcl0Ez6M0X8aeM67LKIiDJAXVeAw-Yi>>>>hVMNtXt-
> >>
> uEs&r=IoX6lQ05T8ggojuUJt27Ff7wSZqFOe_BW7zihIF6LNA&m=g5KNm0_rR>>>>
> >> Dpsx8IAZTePBHXZbMdB1kZoo_V--5hcjJg&s=e-
> >> Iu6cCQbIlNvZ8doJvrVmB13sZh4QSJ>>>>LfLhqkD8KPM&e=
> >> _______________________________________________>>>> tm-dev
> mailing
> >> list>>>> tm-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:tm-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>  To change
> >> your>>>>delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from
> >> this>>>>list, visit
> >>>>>>https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-
> >> 3A__dev.eclipse.org_>>>>mailman_listinfo_tm-2Ddev&d=AAIF-
> >> g&c=Sqcl0Ez6M0X8aeM67LKIiDJAXVeAw-Yi>>>>hVMNtXt-
> >>
> uEs&r=IoX6lQ05T8ggojuUJt27Ff7wSZqFOe_BW7zihIF6LNA&m=g5KNm0_rR>>>>
> >> Dpsx8IAZTePBHXZbMdB1kZoo_V--5hcjJg&s=e-
> >> Iu6cCQbIlNvZ8doJvrVmB13sZh4QSJ>>>>LfLhqkD8KPM&e=>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> _______________________________________________>>> tm-dev
> mailing
> >> list>>> tm-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>>> To change your delivery options,
> >> list>>> retrieve
> >>your
> >> password, or>>>unsubscribe from this list,
> >> visit>>>https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-
> >> 3A__dev.eclipse.org_m>>>ailman_listinfo_tm-2Ddev&d=AAIF-
> >> g&c=Sqcl0Ez6M0X8aeM67LKIiDJAXVeAw-YihV>>>MNtXt-
> >>
> uEs&r=IoX6lQ05T8ggojuUJt27Ff7wSZqFOe_BW7zihIF6LNA&m=g5KNm0_rRDps>
> >> >>x8IAZTePBHXZbMdB1kZoo_V--5hcjJg&s=e-
> >>
> Iu6cCQbIlNvZ8doJvrVmB13sZh4QSJLfLh>>>qkD8KPM&e=>>>>>>>___________
> >> ____________________________________>>tm-dev mailing list>>tm-
> >>dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>>To change your delivery options, retrieve your
> >>password, or
> >> unsubscribe>>from this list,
> >> visit>>https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-
> >> 3A__dev.eclipse.org_ma>>ilman_listinfo_tm-2Ddev&d=AAIF-
> >> g&c=Sqcl0Ez6M0X8aeM67LKIiDJAXVeAw-YihVMN>>tXt-
> >>
> uEs&r=IoX6lQ05T8ggojuUJt27Ff7wSZqFOe_BW7zihIF6LNA&m=g5KNm0_rRDpsx
> >> 8I>>AZTePBHXZbMdB1kZoo_V--5hcjJg&s=e-
> >>
> Iu6cCQbIlNvZ8doJvrVmB13sZh4QSJLfLhqkD8>>KPM&e=>>_________________
> >> ______________________________>tm-dev mailing list>tm-
> >>dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>To change your delivery options, retrieve your
> >>password, or
> >> unsubscribe>from this list,
> >> visit>https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-
> >> 3A__dev.eclipse.org_mailm>an_listinfo_tm-2Ddev&d=AAIF-
> >> g&c=Sqcl0Ez6M0X8aeM67LKIiDJAXVeAw-YihVMNtXt-
> >>
> uE>s&r=IoX6lQ05T8ggojuUJt27Ff7wSZqFOe_BW7zihIF6LNA&m=g5KNm0_rRDps
> >> x8IAZTePBHXZ>bMdB1kZoo_V--5hcjJg&s=e-
> >>
> Iu6cCQbIlNvZ8doJvrVmB13sZh4QSJLfLhqkD8KPM&e=>____________________
> >> ___________________________>tm-dev mailing list>tm-
> dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>To
> >> change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or
> >>unsubscribe>from this
> >> list, visit>https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-
> >> 3A__dev.eclipse.org_mailman_listinfo_tm-
> >> 2Ddev&d=AAIGaQ&c=Sqcl0Ez6M0X8aeM67LKIiDJAXVeAw-YihVMNtXt-
> >>
> uEs&r=IoX6lQ05T8ggojuUJt27Ff7wSZqFOe_BW7zihIF6LNA&m=u3SMWFMuLdu2
> >> 19uG9W6Cjc5VxLeeRAjS0UBKKtixKaU&s=-
> >> 3lWJClgSsIz95Gg__igLfTHEiyMBjoNVNQyts6XeGg&e=
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> tm-dev mailing list
> >> tm-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> >> To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or
> >>unsubscribe from  this list, visit
> >>https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-
> >> 3A__dev.eclipse.org_mailman_listinfo_tm-
> >> 2Ddev&d=AAIGaQ&c=Sqcl0Ez6M0X8aeM67LKIiDJAXVeAw-YihVMNtXt-
> >>
> uEs&r=IoX6lQ05T8ggojuUJt27Ff7wSZqFOe_BW7zihIF6LNA&m=u3SMWFMuLdu2
> >> 19uG9W6Cjc5VxLeeRAjS0UBKKtixKaU&s=-
> >> 3lWJClgSsIz95Gg__igLfTHEiyMBjoNVNQyts6XeGg&e=
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> 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