Orbit Call Minutes 061024

Oct 24, 2006 @ 1400ET

Jeff: I am terrible at talking, thinking and typing all at the same time so these notes are rough and I may have misattributed comments etc. Please correct/clarify as you feel necessary.

Attendees

Martin Oberhuber
Bjorn Freeman-Benson
David Williams
Jeff McAffer
Simon Kaegi
Pascal Rapicault

Discussion

A relatively free form discussion on issues and thoughts related to Orbit process and infrastructure.

Jeff: Set some context for Orbit, what it is, what it is not and who can/should participate
Martin: He is looking to join and commit Apache ORO and Commons Net. They are using these for their target management work in an upcoming 1.0 release. It would be good to leverage the naming conventions etc put forward in Orbit.
Jeff: This would be great and we should act on Martin's offer to participate in the mailing list

David: should we have some review of the bundling and form? Having discussions beforehand would reduce churn.
Jeff: This makes sense and can feed into the best practices docs. People should add sections to the Wiki or open discussions on the mailing list.

David: should we separate the pieces of the components we get from Apache etc. For example, Tomcat comes with several nested bits.
Jeff: This is a best practice item. Initial answer yes, we should seek to componentize as much as possible.

Simon: should we use the qualifier segment in the version numbers? There is a concern that rebuilding will generate new versions with the same content
David: that won't happen unless the CVS tag changes. More generally we probably don't need nightly builds (which would have the characteristic Simon mentioned) and just do all builds as Integration builds (i.e., identifying version tags)

Simon: how should we handle source for the libraries. We can include source zips in the projects or make a file that as a URL to the source
Jeff: The main purpose of having the source is so that people can get/install it and then use it for development/debugging. Currently that means delivering the source in bundles (in some form). Note also that the many projects do not provide source in an easily consumed way so just having a link to a zip on some server does not help alot.
Jeff: We should consider delivering the source in individual bundles and have them built as part of the build. We may need to tweak the build process to help but it should not be a major issue.
Action: Simon to start a wiki page on how to manage source

David: how should we build the Orbit bundles? Proposal to build using the normal PDE build process that many projects are using today.
Discussion: how many map files will be needed etc. The challenge with more than one is how to decide where the entry for a particular bundle goes. Challenge with one is potential collisions during editing. Concluded that for now we'll go with just one and see if there are any issues.
Jeff: we should use the build infrastructure supplied by the Foundation.
Action: David and Bjorn to start setting up the build

David: How many features will be needed? One per bundle? One for all of Orbit? None?
David: is there a legal obligation to expose the licensing via features in the Update workflow. WTP uses one feature per thirdparty lib
Jeff: Don't believe there is a legal obligation. The Eclipse project aggregates the third party license references in the "containing" features and so does not have a feature per lib
Action: Jeff to confirm the legal requirements in this area

Jeff: Features are useful if we are going to have an update site. Some discussion about the uses of an update site.
David: Having separate features allows Update Manager to optimize the download and not download/install the same feature twice.
Pascal: Update manager does not duplicate the downloads
Action: Pascal to confirm that Update Manager does not download a new copy of a bundle that is already installed.

Jeff: How do people want to consume Orbit bundles
David: input into the build. Some people have scripts that suck bundles from update sites. Project update sites are useful when creating the Europa update site.
Jeff: End users will not go to an Orbit update site. They will use the product update site (e.g., Europa)
Conclusion: For now we will create a download site that includes individual JARs as well as one zip of all bundles.

Simon: should the manifests be locallized?
??: Yes.

David: We should ensure that the libs being committed here are traceable back to the Foundation approval.
Conclusion: The CVS commit comment should include a reference to the IPzilla report associated with the library.

Group: Brief discussion around using CVS HEAD with different project names vs. Branches of one project for each version of a lib
Conclusion: use branches for now and revisit in a future call.

Call concluded. Jeff to schedule another call in 2-3 weeks. The time should be about 1100 ET to accomodate west coast and Europe.

Action Items:

Action: Pascal to confirm that Update Manager does not download a new copy of a bundle that is already installed.
Action: Simon to start a wiki page on how to manage source
Action: David and Bjorn to start setting up the build
Action: Jeff to confirm the legal requirements in this area
Action: Jeff to schedule next call