[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
Hi Doug,
To address some of your questions:
There is already a preference page that shows all the connections (Remote Development > Remote Connections). This could be easily turned into a view, but we never felt is was necessary. Did you particularly want a view?
The getCommandShell() API was added because we knew there would come a time when someone would want one. However, PTP does not require a shell currently, so there was no need to implement it. Contributions gratefully accepted :-).
The schema requires filesystem access because our model is to target Unix-like systems. i.e. we don’t currently ever intend support a remote Windows client. However, I would be open to a schema that made this optional, provided that it does not complicate the API significantly.
I’m certainly happy to discuss API changes, and in principal would have no objections provided that they don’t complicate how the existing APIs are used. One of our overriding principles is that there should be minimal setup required by the user (e.g. anything more than a hostname, username and password is discouraged). The use of a custom protocol is only acceptable if it can be installed and configured automatically without any user intervention.
I’m looking forward to seeing your fork, and would be happy to set up a meeting to discuss this further. The next PTP developer meeting is scheduled for 12/9 at 1pm EST, so this might work.
Regards,
Greg
> On Nov 28, 2014, at 3:40 PM, Doug Schaefer <DSchaefer@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> The ideas keep pouring out of my head. I’m really liking the o.e.remote.
> Found a few surprises that might help us unify things.
>
> One thing I found was the getCommandShell() method on IRemoteConnection.
> My next bit of fun will be creating a TCF Terminal extension that will
> hook that up to a terminal. First surprise though was that this method
> isn’t implemented by either Jsch or Local. Should be easy enough though.
> Just figure out the shell and fire it up with a remote process builder.
>
> I am just starting out my Android IRemoteConnection. It doesn’t do much,
> there’s no file system to access (which begged the question why the schema
> is mandatory). But I do have a command shell I could create for it to give
> it access using that same terminal extension.
>
> Which then begs the question why I would need any of the other TCF
> extensions if we could base them all off of
> IRemoteConnection.getCommandShell().
>
> Anyway, I’ll probably post my fork of o.e.remote up to github so you can
> see what I’m doing (and so I can build the Arduino and Momentics IDEs
> based on this work). Might be good to set up a meeting to discuss some of
> this as well. I have questions about how things were done and if people
> mind me changing them.
>
> Have a great weekend.
> Doug.
>
> On 2014-11-27, 3:04 PM, "Doug Schaefer" <dschaefer@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> Also, as I work on adding the API I need to build a remotes view, I’m
>> finding I have to add methods to the existing interfaces, which breaks the
>> API. I could create version 2’s of the interfaces, but that’s going to be
>> painful.
>>
>> If we move to 2.0, we need to make sure we don’t have people extending
>> these interfaces who would be surprised by the breakage in Luna SR-2
>> (where I really want to ship this stuff).
>>
>> Thoughts?
>> Doug.
>>
>> On 2014-11-27, 10:50 AM, "Doug Schaefer" <dschaefer@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>>> Hey Greg,
>>>
>>> Started looking at using the o.e.remote plug-ins as the foundation of the
>>> remote support in the LaunchBar. I’m starting to really like this idea.
>>> As
>>> discussed, it needs a View to show all the current connections. I also
>>> need the list of current connections to show in the Launch Targets
>>> selector in the launch bar.
>>>
>>> Is there API for that? I didn’t find it, and the current APIs look like
>>> they were designed to support remote connection types and not have UI of
>>> it’s own. But I don’t think we’re far from that and I’d be happy to
>>> contribute there.
>>>
>>> BTW, I continue the discussion here on the TM list. I think o.e.remote’s
>>> proper home is probably here. I’m starting to wonder if TCF belongs here
>>> too. Put everything remote/target related into a single project. Just a
>>> thought.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Doug.
>>>
>>> On 2014-11-25, 3:34 PM, "Doug Schaefer" <dschaefer@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>
>>>> We’ll see how my remote stuff works out. I’m going to start working on
>>>> it
>>>> tomorrow.
>>>>
>>>> Now, the Launch Bar is not CDT specific. The remote targets are not CDT
>>>> specific either. In fact, I’d like to be able to build a remote Java
>>>> launch using the same code. I guess it’s a question of how we bring all
>>>> these things together. In fact, I’d love it if the TCF Terminals View
>>>> wasn’t tied to TCF so we could put it in with this pile. And maybe they
>>>> all should be in a project that focuses on the management of targets ;p.
>>>>
>>>> I imagine if we had the commons project set up, we’d be doing a lot of
>>>> this there. The relationships are pretty complicated and I’ve been kind
>>>> of
>>>> ignoring them so I can just build it and get things going. But I will
>>>> make
>>>> sure I minimize the dependencies on CDT to just actual C/C++ things.
>>>>
>>>> On 2014-11-25, 2:56 PM, "Greg Watson" <g.watson@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Is your Targets View CDT specific, or is it something that might be
>>>>> useful to other projects? If the latter, then maybe it should go into
>>>>> org.eclipse.remote?
>>>>>
>>>>> Greg
>>>>>
>>>>> On Nov 25, 2014, at 2:13 PM, Doug Schaefer <DSchaefer@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> 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
>>>>>>>> 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>>> €
>>>>>>>> Greg
>>>>>>>> Watson>>> € Kevin Doyle>>> € Martin Oberhuber>>> € Michael
>>>>>>>> Scharf>>>
>>>>>>>> €
>>>>>>>> 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
>>>>>>>> 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
>>>>>>>> TCF
>>>>>>>> 5.
>>>>>>>> Approval>>> from PMC for termination review 6. Termination review
>>>>>>>> 7.
>>>>>>>> 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?>>>>
>>>>>>>> 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?>>>>
>>>>>>>> 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,
>>>>>>>> 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
>>>>>>>> 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.
>>>>>>>> I¹ve
>>>>>>>> also>>>>invited everyone to the PTP developers conference call to
>>>>>>>> discuss>>>>plans, but no one from TM ever attended. At this point,
>>>>>>>> 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=h
>>>>>>>> t
>>>>>>>> t
>>>>>>>> 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
>>>>>>>> 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
>>>>>>>> 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,
>>>>>>>> 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
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> 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
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
