|Re: [cbi-dev] CBI work, relation to dash-dev and Minerva|
Thanks again for your thoughts and input regarding the CBI.
Others have expertise far outstripping mine in some of these areas but I'll get things started by sharing my thoughts below.
On 12/16/2011 08:16 AM, Paul Webster wrote:
Hi all,I'm checking this out to look into it for myself. I encourage others to comment to share their thoughts.
2) Has CBI decided on a way to expose Igor's work on building on the eclipse hardware?At the moment, we're working with git submodules as a way to aggregate the platform repositories. It seems to be working fairly well for now. Once I've reproduced Igor's build (working on it this week), we'll find an appropriate way to make this public so others can kick it too. Of course this early prototype won't be the production solution since a number of repositories are still in the process of migrating to git in time for Juno. We've wrapped these in git for now for our prototype. Once they're all on git, this should work well.
3) Is this something that will interact with the maven.eclipse.org instance to share p2 repos as they are built?
TBD. I understand there's work to be done to make maven.eclipse.org viable (or set something else up if not). This is something I'll be talking to the folks involved with it and exploring this week.
I think so. It's early of course and thus I may eat my words later, but this seems to me to be something that makes sense to standardize and that we should be able to do so without too much pain. Vendor neutrality is important, and so is ensuring we have the right features we need.
I encourage you and others to help inventory some of the issues we've been facing to date here. That way we can plan for them and make sure they're covered.
Back to the top