Eclipse Community Forums
Forum Search:

Search      Help    Register    Login    Home
Home » Eclipse Projects » Buckminster » Write-back to repositories?
Write-back to repositories? [message #1053139] Thu, 02 May 2013 11:56 Go to next message
Klaus Kopecz is currently offline Klaus Kopecz
Messages: 20
Registered: February 2012
Junior Member
Has there been any discussion about enabling buckminster to write-back into mutable repositories?
One nice thing around the materialization concept is that the one who is triggering a materialization does not need to know where the components actually come from. Actually this might change over time. This seems to be different when submitting component changes. There, an Eclipse user need to deal with the specific repository by, for instance, looking at a Perforce changelist and submitting artifacts. Besides the loss of abstraction this may lead to situations where changes of one component get submitted whereas changes of dependent components are not.
Maybe this not very relevant in reality (otherwise this feature would have been there)? My context is that I want to address "causal" developers which should not be exposed to technical details. They should be able to materialize everything for a certain project, work on it, and basically submit everything back as a whole.
Regards,
Klaus
Re: Write-back to repositories? [message #1053277 is a reply to message #1053139] Fri, 03 May 2013 09:52 Go to previous message
Henrik Lindberg is currently offline Henrik Lindberg
Messages: 2498
Registered: July 2009
Senior Member
On 2013-02-05 17:56, Klaus Kopecz wrote:
> Has there been any discussion about enabling buckminster to write-back
> into mutable repositories? One nice thing around the materialization
> concept is that the one who is triggering a materialization does not
> need to know where the components actually come from. Actually this
> might change over time. This seems to be different when submitting
> component changes. There, an Eclipse user need to deal with the specific
> repository by, for instance, looking at a Perforce changelist and
> submitting artifacts. Besides the loss of abstraction this may lead to
> situations where changes of one component get submitted whereas changes
> of dependent components are not.
> Maybe this not very relevant in reality (otherwise this feature would
> have been there)? My context is that I want to address "causal"
> developers which should not be exposed to technical details. They should
> be able to materialize everything for a certain project, work on it, and
> basically submit everything back as a whole.
> Regards,
> Klaus
afaik, the only concrete discussions have been to enable
comitting/pushing changes produced by a build process, not to aid a user
in some sort of ├╝ber commit.

Don't know what other tools offer in this area; Mylyn comes to mind as a
possible tool as it keeps track of things that have changed.

At one point we were discussing a sort of smart Buckminster co-pilot
that observed everything going on in the workspace, keeping track of
where things came from and suggesting appropriate actions to the user;
"you are using these jars that you added from an unknown source, do you
want to manage them with Buckminster?" The sort of thing you are
suggesting sort of falls in this category. We concluded that there was
simply too much work to create the co-pilot (we referred to it as
"active workspace management"). It quickly became quite complex.

Regards
- henrik
Previous Topic:CSPEC for Java and JavaScript projects?
Next Topic:Strange behavior with cspex file
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Fri Jul 25 19:20:40 EDT 2014

Powered by FUDForum. Page generated in 0.02594 seconds