Re: [wtp-dev] JavaScript Editor with NJSDoc

[Wayne Beaton <wayne@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Sorry to muddy the waters, but if the intent is to merge the fork back into the JSDT project, can we hold off renaming the packages/bundles? I'd love to hear from the JSDT project and PMC regarding the offer before we make John change the code (the changes will make merging more challenging).

I took a quick look at the commit log and it does seem that you're only modifying JSDT core. A lot of these changes appear to just be good housekeeping sorts of things (lots of bug fixes) that I think would be good to have back in the project.

It looks like you've modified the core bundle to support NJSDoc, rather than extend via plug-in. Does it make sense to consider factoring out the NJSDoc specific stuff into a separate bundle?

NJSDoc itself is EPL-licensed; are you thinking of contributing this to the project as well?

Are you willing to join the project as a committer to support your enhancements?

If not JSDT, might this code fit in with VJet?

John

On 04/24/2013 10:12 PM, Mike Milinkovich wrote:

John, 

The end of the week is definitely fine. Thanks for your understanding. 

Mike Milinkovich
mike.milinkovich@xxxxxxxxxxx
+1.613.220.3223

From: John Peberdy

Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2013 4:38 PM

To: mike.milinkovich@xxxxxxxxxxx; General discussion of project-wide or architectural issues.

Cc: license@xxxxxxxxxxx; Ian Skerrett

Subject: Re: [wtp-dev] _javascript_ Editor with NJSDoc

(Resending using the correct email address)

On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 12:57 PM, Mike Milinkovich <mike.milinkovich@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On 24/04/2013 7:56 AM, John Peberdy wrote:

Earlier this month I made this fork of JSDT available. While working on this my goal was to have it eventually merged back in. This is the reason it is currently using the same plugin names. I would be very happy if it did get merged in. I would like to gauge your interested in merging it.

John,

I hate to be the heavy, but I am duty-bound to point out that the Eclipse Foundation considers its namespace as a trademark[1]. Fundamentally, we want the org.eclipse package names to denote code that actually comes from Eclipse projects. Your continued use of the org.eclipse package names is in violation of our trademark policy.

It would be wonderful if your fork can be merged back into the JSDT mainline code development. However, if that is not possible, we would kindly ask that you modify your package names as soon as possible.

Thanks for the feedback, trademark violation was not intentional. I will change the name before the end of the week. If that is not soon enough, let me know! I had not made the change sooner because I was hoping that Eclipse would desire progress in JSDT.
 

[1] http://www.eclipse.org/legal/logo_guidelines.php

Best regards,

Mike Milinkovich
Executive Director,
Eclipse Foundation
_______________________________________________
wtp-dev mailing list
wtp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/wtp-dev

--
John Peberdy

_______________________________________________
wtp-dev mailing list
wtp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/wtp-dev

--
Wayne Beaton
Director of Open Source Projects, The Eclipse Foundation
Learn about Eclipse Projects