[news.eclipse.technology.kepler] Re: Thoughts on a Common Project Model

[Carlos Sanchez <carlos.sanchez@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

I have created a page for the chart at
http://wiki.eclipse.org/Kepler_Common_Models_Matrix

Philip Dodds wrote:
> On 2007-07-25 06:28:05 +0800, Joakim Erdfelt <joakim@xxxxxxxxxxx> said:
> 
>> Philip Dodds wrote:
>>> On 2007-07-12 16:12:21 -0400, Philip Dodds <philip.dodds@xxxxxxxxx>
>>> said:
>>>
>>>> User-Agent: Unison/1.7.9
>>>>
>>>> We have been doing some thinking on creating an extensible common
>>>> project model.
>>>>
>>>> Why do we need a common project model?
>>>>
>>>> A large part of providing a holistic view of the community resources
>>>> and technologies in play within a project is understanding broader
>>>> information about the project.  The Maven styled pom.xml adds a rich
>>>> set of information that can be used to understand both the structure
>>>> of the project, its dependencies but also additional information
>>>> that would support a developer looking to work in a loosely coupled
>>>> manager with a project.
>>>
>>> Continuing this thread of thought -
>>>
>>> Would calling it a collaboration model rather than either common or
>>> community model.  Since the aim of gather information about the
>>> project (everything from mailing lists through to some level of
>>> information about its dependencies and even possiblity its source
>>> structuring).
>>>
>>> The thought here that standard structuring of this information would
>>> lower the barrier to entry for collaboration both as a co-developer
>>> but also a consumer of the project?
>>>
>>> P
>>>
>>
>> I've started to take a stab at identifying the bits and pieces of all
>> of the other models that are out there.
>>
>> See: http://joakim.erdfelt.com/kepler/common_models_matrix.html
>> Other Formats: http://joakim.erdfelt.com/kepler/
>>
>> I've looked at LSM, Maven 1, Maven 2, Eclipse Plug-in Manifest, Java
>> Manifest, OSGi, DOAP, sf.net, freshmeat.net, google code, yum, apt,
>> osdir.com, and the FSF/GNU software map.
>>
>> This is just a first pass, I'll be working out some grouping of
>> concepts shortly.
>>
>> Hopefully this can get some serious discussion started.
>>
>> - Joakim
> 
> Great stuff!! Can you put it on the Kepler Wiki pages - I think Carlos
> has been working on the content and this will be a good addition.
> 
> Tomorrow I'll post up some of the example models that we have been
> putting together to the Wiki - they are current pretty abstract XSD's
> but could be a good start to looking at the commonality.  I think seeing
> the groupings will also help - and maybe a bit of understanding between
> what are significant at the Version level (ie. is historically relevant)
> and what is more Project level - where the latest information is more
> significant.
> 
> Cheers
> 
> P
> 
>