[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
|
[jwt-dev] Re: AW: Components in JWT
|
Hi Florian
Yep, it says "announcing major new efforts at the Release Review is the
easiest way to make these announcements" so let's say the
"transformation" component is ok ^^
About the CVS directories layout, we should talk about it on the phone
(or chat on skype) because else it will endlessly go back and forth.
However I'd push toward keeping the root directories simple, and somehow
having different subtrees for devtime (now we), runtime (now wam) and
"desktop" (aka application impls and simulator).
I'll see about a mentor.
About Miguel, I'll keep you in touch ! Would you be available at
somepoint on Friday ?
Regards
Marc
Florian Lautenbacher a écrit :
Hi Marc, hi all,
I'm writing here about the transformations which we develop (XPDL,
etc.) and whether those should be announced as a new component or not:
I just read again through the answer that Bjorn gave us concerning new
components (see below). He sent us a link which describes when the
membership needs to be notified that we are planning a new component.
In this page [1] it says that Eclipse membership-at-large should not
be surprised by a new component, so they should have the possibility
to know during a release review that there has been this component. As
described in (3) on that page it is also possible to announce major
new features when it has been described in the docuware of any review.
Since we have described the transformations in the release review
paperware for the JWT WE 0.4, I guess we don't need a notification to
the membership or how do you think about that? Maybe we should ask
Anne Jacko concerning that!?
Bjorn was also talking about the mentors and that it would be a good
idea to have one. Since you have more connections with persons from
the STP project you might probably think of somebody who might be our
mentor!? However, I'm not sure who is allowed to be a mentor of the
project...
I think it's great that you'll have a meeting with Miguel and talk
about some of the topics of JWT. I'm looking forward to hear about the
results of these discussions.
Best regards,
Florian
[1] http://www.eclipse.org/projects/dev_process/notifying-membership.php
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Von:* Bjorn Freeman-Benson [mailto:bjorn.freeman-benson@xxxxxxxxxxx]
*Gesendet:* 26 March 2008 01:23
*An:* Florian Lautenbacher
*Cc:* 'Marc Dutoo'
*Betreff:* Re: Components in JWT
Florian, Marc,
I'll write a quick response before I shut my email down for a vacation
- my apologies that my reply to your reply to this email will be delayed.
first of all I'm sorry that this conversation is via email. I tried
to meet you during the last days of EclipseCon, but was not successful.
Ah well. At least it was a great conference. I got to talk to a lot of
people, but in the end there just were not enough hours in the day...
-During the proposal we asked for three initial components: the
workflow editor (WE), a desktop application and a workflow
administration and monitoring (WAM) toolkit. During a lot of
discussions and conversations with people from STP and other
companies, we realized that interoperability and compatibility is a
very important thing which we missed in the first place. Right now
there is one first release of the workflow editor (created a few
weeks ago) and we are now working on several transformations and code
generations in order to realize that interoperability: we now have a
transformation framework with one already realized transformation
from JWT to the WfMC language XPDL and are also working on
transformations from the STP BPMN editor to JWT. So (finally coming
to the point ;-)), how is the correct way to ask for a new component
(which would include all these transformations)?
I even wrote a page about that :-)
http://www.eclipse.org/projects/dev_process/notifying-membership.php
-Normally we probably would ask our mentor, but as I've seen at [1]
most projects of technology have a mentor, but not the projects
Packaging and JWT. What was the reason for this decision? Could we
get a mentor? Are you the right person to ask these questions or
shall we ask Anne Jacko instead?
Projects that were started earlier do not have official mentors
(because we didn't have the "mentors" policy in place at that time). I
think it's a good idea to have Mentors and I applaud your idea of
retroactively acquiring some - go for it!
In the meantime, I can answer those questions as can Anne (and, if
Anne doesn't know the answer, she asks me).
-At the same page [1] I can see that our website /is/ (or at least
/was/ in July) not in compliance with the Board-required standards.
Is there a way you might let us know what is wrong, so we can change
that?
At the time there were more required elements, but in the meantime
we've relaxed the constraints and so you're now in conformance. I
would recommend that you change the "Information about JWT" to "About
this project" and that you change the green alien (most people didn't
like him) to the newer egg:
http://www.eclipse.org/projects/dev_process/incubation-conforming.php
-A general question: the Technology Project PMC Minutes seem to have
stopped in July last year and the last minutes [2] discussed who
should be member of that PMC. But I can't find how the decision for
that was. At that moment (in July last year) we were just starting
and extending our involvement and haven't been aware of the
Technology internal discussions (we were never informed about that),
so what is the current status of that now?
Yes, sigh, the Technology PMC hasn't had a meeting in quite a while.
We've fallen down on the job, I'm afraid. I need to resurrect and
revitalize the PMC and bring in a new set of members.
-Is there anything else we have not been aware of and which you might
like us to know for our future work? For example, we would like to
make an article in an Eclipse magazine in the near future describing
the ideas and motivation behind JWT and the usage of the first
plugin. Are there some guidelines from the Eclipse board or
technology PMC what should be considered for that?
Excellent and, no, there are no restrictions or constraints about that
kind of promotion. The only real constraint is that you cannot say
that you have a "release" until you have been through a Release
Review. See
http://www.eclipse.org/projects/dev_process/development_process.php?version=proposed
section 6.4
Thanks in advance for your support and best regards,
Regards,
Bjorn
--
[end of message]
