Darn, I could have sworn I read that somewhere. Regardless, the only thing I care about is that from a branding perspective, all of the provider names for Eclipse projects start with Eclipse.
The others on this list or on the PC can decide the rest of the convention.
Mike Milinkovich mike.milinkovich@xxxxxxxxxxx +1.613.220.3223 (mobile) From: "Oberhuber, Martin" Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2009 23:40:41 +0100 To: <mike.milinkovich@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Cross project issues<cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>; <mik.kersten@xxxxxxxxxxx> Subject: RE: [cross-project-issues-dev] Questionabout theBranding requirement for Galileo
Ahem, cough.... ... this was a release train requirement which I'd love to leave in the PC's hands. Unless they want to consult with the AC... but architecturally, it doesn't seem to be all that relevant to me. It's just a name, and its effect on the community is more in the marketing / shipping / bundling realm which the PC deals with. Cheers, -- Martin Oberhuber, Senior Member of Technical Staff, Wind River Target Management Project Lead, DSDP PMC Member
Actually, I will retract my last statement. I believe that the EAC has it on its agenda to discuss the naming convention. The only thing I care about is that from a branding perspective, all of the provider names for Eclipse projects start with Eclipse. The rest of the naming convention I will leave to the EACs capable hands, including what to do with the eponymous Eclipse Project. My apologies for any confusion I may have caused. From: Oberhuber, Martin [mailto:Martin.Oberhuber@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] Sent: March-19-09 5:39 PM To: mike.milinkovich@xxxxxxxxxxx; Cross project issues; mik.kersten@xxxxxxxxxxx Subject: RE: [cross-project-issues-dev] Questionabout theBranding requirement for Galileo AFAIK it was said that "major projects" should have differing provider names only. Or do we change this now to allow separate provider for every project? Cheers, -- Martin Oberhuber, Senior Member of Technical Staff, Wind River Target Management Project Lead, DSDP PMC Member http://www.eclipse.org/dsdp/tm From: cross-project-issues-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:cross-project-issues-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Mike Milinkovich Sent: Donnerstag, 19. März 2009 22:08 To: mik.kersten@xxxxxxxxxxx; 'Cross project issues' Subject: RE: [cross-project-issues-dev] Questionabout theBranding requirement for Galileo Worksforme. Although, I am not sure what were going to do with the Eclipse guys. Eclipse Eclipse JDT doesnt sound right. Anyone have a nice solution for that one? From: Mik Kersten [mailto:mik@xxxxxxxxxxx] Sent: March-19-09 4:28 PM To: 'Cross project issues' Cc: mike.milinkovich@xxxxxxxxxxx Subject: RE: [cross-project-issues-dev] Question about theBranding requirement for Galileo -1 on trailing every name with Project since it will be redundant and make it harder to scan the list, which will already have Eclipse at the start of each line. Also, it would be nice if the naming were consistent with the project listing that comes from the metadata: http://www.eclipse.org/projects/listofprojects.php To help reflect the project structure in the About dialog, which can easily be sorted by Provider, we could prefix the listings with the top level project names, e.g.: · Eclipse EMF Model Development Tools (MDT) · Eclipse Tools PHP Development Tools (PDT) · Eclipse Tools Orbit Mik From: cross-project-issues-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:cross-project-issues-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Mike Milinkovich Sent: Thursday, March 19, 2009 1:17 PM To: 'Cross project issues' Subject: RE: [cross-project-issues-dev] Question about theBranding requirement for Galileo My request is that everyone use Eclipse in front of every provider name. Not Eclipse.org. Eclipse is our brand. I do not have a strong opinion on whether it should be DTP Project or Data Tools Platform Project. The latter feels more informative, but I would defer to the collective wisdom here. From: cross-project-issues-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:cross-project-issues-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Oberhuber, Martin Sent: March-19-09 1:48 PM To: Cross project issues Subject: RE: [cross-project-issues-dev] Question about theBranding requirement for Galileo Some time last year, there was a recommendation to use Eclipse DSDP Project Eclipse DTP Project Eclipse CDT Project ... but now we have Eclipse.org - Equinox I agree with John that a clear naming convention would be good. Cheers, -- Martin Oberhuber, Senior Member of Technical Staff, Wind River Target Management Project Lead, DSDP PMC Member http://www.eclipse.org/dsdp/tm From: cross-project-issues-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:cross-project-issues-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of John Arthorne Sent: Donnerstag, 19. März 2009 18:11 To: Cross project issues Subject: Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Question about theBranding requirement for Galileo Please disregard this... I sent it before seeing Mike M's clarification email. John Arthorne/Ottawa/IBM@IBMCA Sent by: cross-project-issues-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx 03/19/2009 12:07 PM Please respond to Cross project issues <cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx> | | To | Cross project issues <cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx> | cc | | Subject | Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Question about the Branding requirement for Galileo |
|
It would have been nice for the planning council to give a more specific recommendation for the plugin "provider name". I'm worried we'll end up with a real mixed bag of naming conventions that will look unpolished when mixed together (inconsistent in capitalization, etc). For what it's worth, we ended up using "Eclipse.org - Equinox" for the Equinox project. Having "Eclipse" in there still seemed valuable for end users who might not be familiar with Eclipse project code names. If an end user sees "Data Tools Platform" as the provider, I'm not sure they will make the connection to an Eclipse project by that name...
John brian.fitzpatrick@xxxxxxxxxx Sent by: cross-project-issues-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx 03/19/2009 11:02 AM Please respond to Cross project issues <cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx> | | To | Cross project issues <cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx> | cc | | Subject | [cross-project-issues-dev] Question about the Branding requirement for Galileo |
|
Hi all...
Was running through the list of requirements for Galileo and we're down to the Branding must-do requirement for Galileo in DTP. After chatting with David Williams a bit yesterday, it seemed like a good idea to bounce these questions to the cross projects list to see if anyone had any suggestions. :)
The "Branding" requirement states: "Each major project (as determined by participating PMCs) should have an About dialog icon with descriptive text (e.g. provider name = "Eclipse Modeling Project" and not simply Eclipse.org) and contribute to the welcome page."
To address this requirement, we're going to follow the example provided in the description and change "Eclipse.org" to "Data Tools Platform" for all of the DTP plug-ins and features as the provider name. Easy enough.
However, none of us in DTP are graphic artists (by any stretch of the imagination), so we're hoping we can continue to use the same icon used by the Eclipse Platform for our About dialog icon in Galileo. (That is unless someone on the list has some graphic design, some time, and a fantastic idea for a custom DTP icon. :) ) Though lame, using the older icon should address the requirement and we can try and find a graphic designer in the next release to update our look and give it a stylish new icon.
The final part of the requirement is to contribute to the welcome page. I'm guessing this is the general platform welcome page, since DTP also has its own welcome page that comes up sometimes. (I'm not exactly sure of what the rules are about why/how that page appears sometimes and not others, but I'm guessing there's a pattern there I'm just not seeing.) That said, we would like to contribute to the main welcome page if DTP is installed, but have no idea how to do that.
David mentioned that there are some "easy to use" extension points, but I'm curious if it's been documented what exactly we're supposed to contribute to meet this requirement and how we're supposed to do that. Any ideas, links, suggestions, and so on would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks in advance!
--Fitz
Brian Fitzpatrick Eclipse Data Tools Platform PMC Chair Eclipse Data Tools Platform Connectivity & Enablement Team Lead Staff Software Engineer, Sybase, Inc._______________________________________________ cross-project-issues-dev mailing list cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev _______________________________________________ cross-project-issues-dev mailing list cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev
|