Re: [wtp-pmc] planning council summary -- and architecture council summa

[David M Williams <david_williams@xxxxxxxxxx>]

The only a few additional points I'd
like to add:

1. Some care will be needed with the
Java 5 dependancy.

1. Its not at all clear to me that we in WTP should (or would *have* to move to Java 5) ... EMF will likely maintain a 1.4 version. I'm not saying we should not move ... but, it will take some study, some effort, and I'm just saying its an unknown. The EMF migration path is the key, if its near automatic,  fine .. if its lots of re-write ... then ... well, who's to do it.
   
2. Even if most of WTP moves to Java 1.5 dependancy, there are some of our "lower level" plugins that probably should not ... unless there's other overwhelming reasons to. What I'd recommend here is that anything that is in "common" feature, that has the _potential_ to move lower in Eclipse (e.g. Facets? XML Catalog? Proxy stuff?) should steer clear of Java 5 dependancy,  since the Eclipse platform itself will be trying to stay on "foundation" classes only for most of their plugins.
                  
3. We can have a mix of plugins (some requiring 1.4, some 1.5) but then we should improve build process so that each plugin is built with right libraries (supposedly "easy to do" ... but .. something new that someone would have to do).
   
4. I was surprised there was little discussion of Java 6! As its currently scheduled for October of this year, from Sun. I assume that's because its seen as "small" changes compared to Java 5, but, my guess is there will be something that comes up that will require at least discussion. (such as JAX-WS 2.0? (http://www.javaworld.com/javaworld/jw-07-2006/jw-0703-mustang.html).
   

2. For the "Callisto maintenance
release", I suggest we announce now that 8/15 be the cut off for hot-bugs
to be suggested by adopters, as that would be one month before the maintenance
release candidate is needed.    (That is .. there's not that
much time!) 

3. There is a movement to have an Eclipse
Orbit Project to serve as a common project/repository for 3rd party jars/packages.
As we in WTP have several, and several "common" ones, I recommend
we participate. (I'm currently listed as an initial committer ... should
not be too much extra work ...  we would still have the same work
to do (i.e. doesn't save us much)).

4. There was some discussion of a "common
build" project, but I do not think anything concrete will come of
it ... but, the suggestion was that other projects could and should contribute
to the "base builder" that we all use. 

5 And finally,  contrary to any
rumors you may have heard, I did not make my self sick on cake ... this
time :)

"Tim Wagner" <twagner@xxxxxxx>
Sent by: wtp-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx

07/01/2006 05:33 AM

Please respond to
"WTP PMC communications (including coordination, announcements,  and Group discussions)" <wtp-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx>

To	"WTP PMC communications (including coordination, announcements,  and Group discussions)" <wtp-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx>
cc
Subject	[wtp-pmc] planning council summary

The planning council met in Chicago this
past week. Some of what was discussed was the “plan for a plan” for Europa
(the “Callisto of 2007”). Some concrete details that affect WTP:
 
·
        The first
Callisto maintenance pack will ship on Friday, September 29th
with a mid-September RC. All Callisto projects pledged to be on that train
(including us).
·
        There will
be a second maintenance pack, some strategy in the late January / early
February timeframe (no specific date assigned yet).
·
        For Europa,
projects are requested to “join the train” as early as possible – ideally
by October. This will provide platform with useful feedback and help mitigate
risk. A similar “pile on window” will be used as for Callisto, with the
platform reaching milestone dates, then 1st level dependencies,
then 2nd level dependencies, etc.
·
        EMF has decided
to require Java 5 (aka 1.5)-level VM for its Europa release; this essentially
dictates that we do likewise. (Which is helpful in that our focus on EE
5 for the 2.0 release requires annotation processing APIs.)
·
        IBM proposed
a new approach using an Eclipse project to produce language packs in the
post-Callisto timeframe, and solicited other members to join them in that
effort.
·
        Janet Campbell
reviewed the IP process, for which we now have a handy new flowchart (need
to get the online pointer; we looked at printed material).
 
There was also some discussion of process
pain points, especially IP reviews, a debrief of what went right/wrong
with Callisto, and a cake for David (who may want to chime in with additional
items and/or architecture council summary for WTP).
 
The Board discussions included (along with
the usual procedural stuff):
 
·
        Some discussion
of the competitive threat netbeans represents
o
       It would be
helpful to review the “WTP of netbeans” functionality and develop a feature-by-feature
comparison to see how our project stacks up.
o
       ATF represents
a significant leading edge technology and “coolness / wow” factor that
we should exploit further.
·
        Removal of
the prohibition on “server” projects at Eclipse (since we have several
already)
 
Let me know if you have further questions
about either of these meetings.
 _______________________________________________
wtp-pmc mailing list
wtp-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/wtp-pmc