[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [wtp-pmc] JPA Diagram Editor Release Review

> The EDP provides for considerable flexibility around incubators. In
> general, incubators are a place to try new ideas in a very
> lightweight way (no additional management overhead, ability to use
> the Parallel IP process, relatively easy to add new committers, that
> sort of thing). As those ideas get heavier (i.e. more real), the EDP
> provides for those ideas to be extracted and grown into separate
> projects of their own. I would argue that we should probably have
> considered moving the JPA Diagram Editor out of the incubator a
> while ago (around the time that it stopped being an idea that you
> were bouncing around and it turned into something with legs of its own).


I don't disagree with anything that has been said, but will add some history and additional use-cases here. We in WTP (and WTP Incubator) have released incubating components in the past, prior to graduating into a project, such as for XSL 0.5. I don't recall if this was an exception to the "only projects release" rule at the time (several years ago), or simply several EDPs versions ago where the rules were not clear or did not prohibit it. The reason for doing that sort of thing, that I do not think has been emphasized enough, is that one or more adopters wanted to use it in their own release of a product or other open source project. They are motivated simply to have an IP clean version that will be persisted for a long time (on downloads, or archives, as our WTP policy is to archive all releases, but little else). The dynamic behind this is simply that they may not care if it is not quite a mature "stand on its own" project, but it serves their needs. And while we normally discourage people from using pre-1.0 code in products or project releases ... at the same time, we are highly motivated to fill the needs of adopters.

Also keep in mind, some other reasons for having an incubator is having an lower bar for committers to get started, that do not yet have a long, visible history at Eclipse ... thus, the code they are working on may not be so much "exploring new ideas", but lean more towards simply "exploring open development" ... learning the ropes of working at Eclipse, both the mechanics and culture of working in the open. In fact, I'd say very little of the current code/components in WTP Incubator are simply "trying new ideas" but most are very well established ideas, that are simply trying to firm up their code while collaborating with potential adopters and committers, firming up their activity levels, and get into the "Eclipse Way" of managing builds, having regular milestones, managing bugzilla, mailing lists, newsgroups, forums, open status meetings, etc. (all no small task, as is well known).

I think in this specific case, some deadlines crept up on us sooner than we expected, and yes, we could have gotten started earlier ... but, not sure that's the only thing to learn. It does seem that perhaps we have been putting too much in the general WTP Incubator, and in the future, we should just request new proposals to just to go ahead and propose a new incubating subproject and reserve the WTP Incubator for simply kicking around new ideas. Well, that, and just make sure everyone knows well up front that nothing from WTP Incubator can release (I probably did know that, at some level, but didn't really think it through in the normal course of meetings and planning).

I do not know how much need there would be for it, that is, don't know if worth expending effort on improving EDP, but there might be some need to have a different type of release, let's call it a "pre 1.0 release" that could be components, lets say of incubating projects only, and would mostly mean "IP Clean" but not rise to the level of "graduating" into its own project. But, again, I don't disagree with what has been said, and I do not see much harm in encouraging more and quicker movement of incubating components to incubating subprojects, since that doesn't mean it has to be final ... it could always move and reorganize later. But it may just take us some time to "internalize" this way of thinking and make it a practice.  In any case, I have opened
an "EDP Bug" (330729) to document and discuss possible long term changes in EDP to allow incubating components to release, in case it comes up frequently.

Wayne, we appreciate your attention and efforts on helping us with our projects and processes.
And Kaloyan, I especially appreciate your efforts to blaze these trails and help these fledgling components get through the processes so adopters can take advantage of the functionality.

Thanks to you both.




From:        Wayne Beaton <wayne@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To:        "Raev, Kaloyan" <kaloyan.raev@xxxxxxx>
Cc:        "WTP PMC communications \(including coordination, announcements,        and Group discussions\)" <wtp-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx>, "Dimov,        Stefan" <stefan.dimov@xxxxxxx>
Date:        11/19/2010 11:17 AM
Subject:        Re: [wtp-pmc] JPA Diagram Editor Release Review
Sent by:        wtp-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx




The EDP provides for considerable flexibility around incubators. In general, incubators are a place to try new ideas in a very lightweight way (no additional management overhead, ability to use the Parallel IP process, relatively easy to add new committers, that sort of thing). As those ideas get heavier (i.e. more real), the EDP provides for those ideas to be extracted and grown into separate projects of their own. I would argue that we should probably have considered moving the JPA Diagram Editor out of the incubator a while ago (around the time that it stopped being an idea that you were bouncing around and it turned into something with legs of its own).

I will review your proposal document and return any feedback to you before I post it and announce it to the membership. It'll need to be vetted by EMO(ED) as well. I will initiate the trademark search immediately so that we are prepared for the Creation Review.

We can combine the Creation and Release reviews which will effectively alloyou to release as soon as the review is complete, but prior to provisioning. The only wrinkle is that there will be no official place to put the bits. I suppose that it would be reasonable to put the bits (at least temporarily) in the downloads area for the WTP Incubator if that is acceptable by the PMC.

The initial contribution will be the result of a move. No CQ is required. The CQs corresponding to the code will be moved along with the code.

We will need to do the IP Log review prior to the release. I don't think that the Woolsey tools are quite ready yet (I'm hoping for a December release), but the existing automated log tool seems to work [1]. Though you may need to remove some stuff manually; if you log in there is a mechanism to help you with this. Alternatively, you can snapshot the HTML and just hack out the bits that shouldn't be there.

Actually... this will be easier with Woolsey. If you want to give Woolsey a try, let me know and I'll put up a repository and spend a couple of hours providing some initial documentation. That's going to have to happen sooner or later anyway

HTH,

Wayne

[1]
http://www.eclipse.org/projects/ip_log.php?projectid=webtools.incubator

Raev, Kaloyan wrote:

Hi Wayne,
 
OK… I think the root problem is that the EMO and (at least part of) the Eclipse committers have different understanding of the Incubator project. My take away from this story is to never ever dare to think about using an Incubator project for whatever purpose.
 
Please, find attached the proposal document for the JPA Diagram Editor. It’s almost the same as the one we did to start the project as new component in the WTP Incubator.
 
Walking this way, I have now more and more open questions, that I need answers for in order to make some reasonable planning:
·         We have to wait at least 3 weeks for the project to be created. That’s clear.
·         Can we release before the provisioning of the project completes (but after the project is created)? We can use the existing infrastructure in WTP Incubator for this first release.
·         Do we need to reiterate the IP review of the initial contribution? The initial contribution will be the existing code in the CVS of the WTP Incubator. It has a completed IP review.
·         What happen with the CQs we’ve done while being in the WTP Incubator project? Do we have to reapply for them before releasing?
 
Regarding your suggestion to move the code as a new component under the Dali project. We discussed this at the WTP PMC. But, as you have already mentioned, components do not release by themselves. Since our goal for this first release is to be compatible to Helios, moving the component from the WTP Incubator to Dali, does not help at all. Dali already rides the Indigo train. Releasing a new version of the whole Dali project (just to release the JPA Diagram Editor) has a greater complexity of the issue we are discussing now.
 
Greetings,
Kaloyan
 
 
From: Wayne Beaton [mailto:wayne@xxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent:
17 ноември 2010 г. 23:46 ч.
To:
Raev, Kaloyan
Cc:
Dimov, Stefan; WTP PMC communications (including coordination, announcements, and Group discussions); Mike Milinkovich
Subject:
Re: JPA Diagram Editor Release Review

 
FWIW *every* time I start an email like my last I first try to resolve to myself whether or not I think the process is reasonable. This is why I suggested the Creation/Release review combination using the most aggressive timeline possible. If you believe that the EDP needs to be adjusted, feel free to open bugs against Community/Process for consideration next time we revise the EDP.

I'm sure that a good chunk of the world already knows about the JPA Diagram Editor. I must, however, confess that I had not heard of it before I received your request for release. I actually spent a good deal of time going through our database and my mail log to make sure that I hadn't just forgotten about it. The proposal and review period is to give the community and other concerned parties an opportunity to comment, criticize and otherwise get involved. While it may feel like unnecessary bureaucracy to post a proposal and engage in a review, the EMO and the Board consider it to be an important part of the process. A lot of organizations, including many of our board members and adopters, are not able to monitor every forum upon which communication occurs. They depend on EMO communication about new projects to keep up with and get involved with new developments.

I agree that there is an element of restructuring happening as part of this: the relevant code from the incubator will move it a new project (that restructuring will be implicit in the creation). That new project, however, is not the result of restructuring the incubator. You are not factoring the scope of the WTP Incubator or breaking it into manageably-sized subprojects. Such is the nature of incubators. Incubators are an ideal place to start working on new ideas, but once those new ideas gain an identity of their own, it's time for them to move into a newly-minted project. The incubator does not restructure every time code moves out of it.

Perhaps it can be argued that the EDP does not make this clear enough, and--while I loathe to add more words to the EDP--perhaps the next iteration needs to better define the intent. I believe that the line "The scope of any new project must be a subset of the scope of the original project." covers my interpretation. I don't believe that we can reasonably state that the scope of the new project you want to create is a subset of the scope of the incubator.

If the JPA Diagram Editor makes sense as a subproject of Dali, could it also just be a piece of Dali? Is there some reason that a new project is required? Does the function of JPA Diagram Editor fall within the scope of Dali? If we can argue that JPA Diagram Editor is a reasonable piece of Dali, then we can initiate a restructuring review and then Dali can do a release (of course, you'll have to get the project on board for the release).

Wayne

On 17/11/2010 1:32 PM, Raev, Kaloyan wrote:

Wayne,
 
I think we are entering a process hell that goes completely out of rationale.
 
The development of the JPA Diagram Editor in the Eclipse community has been done in a transparent way. We did a proposal for the WTP Incubator. It was discussed in the wtp-dev mailing list and in the WTP PMC. We posted some blogs to planet.eclpise.org during the development. We did a talk at Eclipse Summit Europe. We had some discussion in the Eclipse Forums. We did CQs, IP Reviews, IP logs…
 
The world knows about the JPA Diagram Editor and that it is developed in the WTP Incubator. Spending 3 weeks (or perhaps many more as I see where the wind blows to) in reiterating the complete EDP will not give more transparency or get any new feedback.
 
I understand it was a terrible mistake starting the project in the WTP Incubator, but I hope we can find a meaningful solution in an acceptable time. We just want to release. If EDP does not allow this, or wants to make our life miserable in order to release, then the EDP is wrong, or we read it in a wrong way.
 
I really don’t understand why this cannot be considered as Restructuring of the WTP Incubator project. Over the last months we’ve done a lot of work and produced some artifacts like code, Bugzilla items, CQs, etc. We want to *move* them to a new place, where we can release from. We don’t want to throw them away and start from scratch. Yes, this new place is a new project, but chapter 6.3.8 of EDP says that, as part of the Restructuring Review, new projects can be created. And the time for the review is still one week.
 
Greetings,
Kaloyan
 
 
From: Wayne Beaton [mailto:wayne@xxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent:
17 ноември 2010 г. 20:03 ч.
To:
Raev, Kaloyan
Cc:
Dimov, Stefan; WTP PMC communications (including coordination, announcements, and Group discussions)
Subject:
Re: JPA Diagram Editor Release Review

 
I think we're really talking about a creation review. While it might be convenient to think of it as such, you're not really restructuring the incubator.

A creation review requires a proposal period of no less than two weeks followed by one week of review (a total of three weeks). If you can get me a proposal document before noon ET tomorrow, we can have the project created by Dec. 8 and provisioned shortly thereafter.

http://wiki.eclipse.org/Development_Resources/HOWTO/Starting_A_New_Project

I'm pretty sure that this has never been done before, but we could consider a combined Creation/Release review. This will allow you to release as soon after provisioning as you can manage.

We should start with a proposal document as normal, and then build a Creation/Release Review document in time for the release. If you can have the proposal document ready by tomorrow, the review document would need to be ready by Dec 1.

HTH,

Wayne

Raev, Kaloyan wrote:

Hi Wayne,
 
Any news from you? I missed to tell that there is a time pressure. We would like to have the release available on December 1st at latest. I hope we have enough time to go through EDP.
 
I am reading the about EDP right now. I find chapter 6.3.8 Restructuring Review relevant for our case:
A Restructuring Review may necessitate the construction of one or more new projects. This tends to occur when an existing project is decomposed into two or more projects. In this case, a Restructuring Review is similar to a Creation Review. Any new projects that are created as part of a Restructuring Review must have their scope explicitly specified as part of the review. The scope of any new project must be a subset of the scope of the original project.
 
So, in our case we would like to take part of the WTP Incubator project – the JPA Diagram Editor component, and create a new project for it with the same scope, code and committers. And we want to combine this (chapter 6.3.9) with a Release Review.
 
Please, let me know if this is meaningful and possible. I will appreciate any hints about required documents.
 
Thanks,
Kaloyan
 
 
From: Raev, Kaloyan
Sent:
16 ноември 2010 г. 19:38 ч.
To:
'Wayne Beaton'
Cc:
Dimov, Stefan; 'WTP PMC communications (including coordination, announcements, and Group discussions)'
Subject:
RE: JPA Diagram Editor Release Review

 
Hi Wayne,
 
We have just discussed this issue in the WTP PMC. We decided that the best approach should be that the JPA Diagram Editor, which is currently a WTP Incubator Component, “moves” to a new subproject (yet incubating) under the WTP Dali project. So, at the end, we release version 0.5 from this new JPA Diagram Editor project and not from the WTP Incubator component.
 
Now, the big question is: “How is this going to happen?”. We suggest that we extend the Release Review to a “Pre-graduation Release Review + Move/Creation Review”. We will include some more slides in the document, which describe the “move mechanics” – what infrastructure moves where.
 
Does this sound reasonable? Do we need to create a new proposal document? We still have the one from the time we introduced the JPA Diagram Editor in the WTP Incubator:
http://wiki.eclipse.org/WTP/JPA_Diagram_Editor/Proposal
 
Greetings,
Kaloyan
 
 
From: Raev, Kaloyan
Sent:
12 ноември 2010 г. 18:54 ч.
To:
'Wayne Beaton'
Cc:
Dimov, Stefan
Subject:
RE: JPA Diagram Editor Release Review

 
Thanks, Wayne.
 
We will discuss this in the PMC.
 
Greetings,
Kaloyan
 
From: Wayne Beaton [mailto:wayne@xxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent:
12 ноември 2010 г. 18:47 ч.
To:
Raev, Kaloyan
Cc:
Dimov, Stefan
Subject:
Re: JPA Diagram Editor Release Review

 
There is no notion of releasing a component in the EDP. Only projects can release and projects designated as "incubators" don't tend to release at all.

If you think that JPA Diagram Editor is ready to stand on its own outside of the incubator, then maybe it's time to create a new project for it. Or perhaps it should move to another project under WTP and align with their release schedule.

Wayne

Woolsey's not ready yet.

Raev, Kaloyan wrote:

Hi Wayne,
 
We would like to schedule a release review for the JPA Diagram Editor, which is currently incubating under the WTP Incubator.
 
Which is the next possible date to schedule a Release Review?
 
I attach the docuware, that Stefan (the project lead) has prepared. The only thing left is to generate the IP Log. Could you give us some instructions how to do this? We try to use the Woolsey tools, but we are not sure if it is “production ready”. Could you point us to some documentation how to use it?
 
Thanks,
Kaloyan Raev
Senior Developer

TD Core JS App Model & Dev
SAP Labs Bulgaria

136A Tzar Boris 3 blvd.

1618 Sofia, Bulgaria

T +359 2 9157-416

mailto:
kaloyan.raev@xxxxxxx
www.sap.com
Save a tree - please do not print this email unless you really need to.

 
 
 
 
--
Wayne Beaton, The Eclipse Foundation
http://www.eclipse.org
--
Join me at EclipseCon 2011
http://eclipsecon.org/



--
Wayne Beaton, The Eclipse Foundation
http://www.eclipse.org
--
Join me at EclipseCon 2011
http://eclipsecon.org/

--
Wayne Beaton, The Eclipse Foundation
http://www.eclipse.org
--
Join me at EclipseCon 2011
http://eclipsecon.org/
_______________________________________________
wtp-pmc mailing list
wtp-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/wtp-pmc