Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
RE: [dsdp-pmc] RE: [cdt-dev] CDT and Galileo

I have no objections to Martin's proposals.

I do object to removing features from the update site so that the set of features there solely corresponds to what is in the C/C++ IDE package (Doug's proposal). A few reasons:

  1. These features have been in the simultaneous release update sites already (e.g. Ganymede). Users will expect them to be there again. We have been telling users to get these components there already.
  2. The Galileo site as far as I know is intended to be an entry point to discovering what components are out there. Without it, I doubt many people will find these features as they'll be buried on other update sites that don't get much press. There will be no other good avenue for discovery of features.
  3. The dependency resolution issue that Martin mentioned.
  4. People that just want the C/C++ IDE are just going to download it from the main Eclipse page anyway and are not likely to go to the Galileo update site to get anything, so catering to them seems to be a waste of energy.

Regards,

===========================
Chris Recoskie
Team Lead, IBM CDT and RDT
IBM Toronto
Inactive hide details for "Oberhuber, Martin" <Martin.Oberhuber@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>"Oberhuber, Martin" <Martin.Oberhuber@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>


          "Oberhuber, Martin" <Martin.Oberhuber@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
          Sent by: cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx

          05/13/2009 04:09 PM

          Please respond to
          "CDT General developers list." <cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>

To

"CDT General developers list." <cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>

cc


Subject

RE: [dsdp-pmc] RE: [cdt-dev] CDT and Galileo

I do want to make this happen, but I'm not a CDT committer. So, in order to proceed, I'd like to ask the CDT community:
    1. Are there any objectsions against contributing the mentioned features to Galileo?
    2. Any objections against renaming the two features (DSF, Memory View) as proposed?
    3. Any other comments, particularly from those working on DSF / Memory Rendering?
    4. Vivian could you help me making it happen?
I think I could provide patches if needed, at least for renaming the features, I haven't yet looked at what mechanisms the CDT uses for contributing to Galileo (is it just manual copying of the feature ID's and versions into the .build file when releasing a drop, or anything more elaborate).

Thanks,
--
Martin Oberhuber, Senior Member of Technical Staff, Wind River
Target Management Project Lead, DSDP PMC Member
http://www.eclipse.org/dsdp/tm




From: dsdp-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:dsdp-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Doug Schaefer
Sent:
Mittwoch, 13. Mai 2009 18:33
To:
DSDP PMC list
Subject:
Re: [dsdp-pmc] RE: [cdt-dev] CDT and Galileo

I've stopped commenting on Galileo and its repo site. I don't want to lose too many friends. If someone else wants to make this happen feel free.

Doug.

On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 5:57 AM, Oberhuber, Martin <Martin.Oberhuber@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
    Hi Doug,

    In my opinion, the biggest benefit of the coordinated update site in the past was that dependencies got automatically resolved.

    The "two-step-installation" scenario that you propose for "optional add-ons" to CDT is flawed in several ways:
      • In the Remote CDT case, I need to think about installing RSE in the first step BEFORE I get the remote launcher in the 2nd step. Who would ever think about this?
      • Optional pieces are hard to find. As of Galileo M7, no additional repositories are added when I install all of Galileo. I won't know the URL of the CDT repository. This may be a current p2 bug, but on the other hand, if all contributing project's repositories were added, how would I find the CDT one?
      • DD-DSF and RemoteCDT have been on Ganymede. Not having them in Galileo is a regression. Clients may just expect finding it there.
    While I agree that the Galileo site is going to become large, I cannot see how adding the following would lead to any more confusion:
      • Collaboration > Mylyn Bridge: C/C++ Development
      • Device Development > Eclipse C/C++ DSF gdb Integration
      • Device Development > Eclipse C/C++ Memory View Enhancements
      • Device Development > Eclipse C/C++ Remote Launch
    I took the freedom of remaming some of the features (memory view, DSF, Remote Launch) for the sake of being more end-user consumable on a coordinated site such as Galileo. But given that p2 finally sorts contributions alphabetically, I would really appreciate seeing these contributions on Galileo.

    I do believe that having these on Galileo is important for the whole DSDP message, thus I'm CC'ing the DSDP PMC.

    And BTW, as I've mentioned before I'm in favor of re-introducing the Ganymede category name of "Remote Access and Device Development" rather than just Device Development as it's today.

    Cheers,
    --
    Martin Oberhuber, Senior Member of Technical Staff, Wind River
    Target Management Project Lead, DSDP PMC Member
    http://www.eclipse.org/dsdp/tm




    From: cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Doug Schaefer
    Sent:
    Montag, 11. Mai 2009 16:19

    To:
    CDT General developers list.
    Subject: Re: [cdt-dev] CDT and Galileo

    Hi Martin. We're treat the Galileo repository as a spring board to the C/C++ IDE. All other features for the CDT, of which there are many, are available in the CDT repository. We discussed removing remoteCDT from Galileo, and it was a tough decision, but we've decided to treat it under the same rules as the other CDT features. The Galileo repo is going to be a disaster. There are way too many projects contributing to it and I don't want to add to the mess.

    At the end of the day, the EPP packages should be the main vehicle where the user community gets their Eclipse plugins. We need an Embedded Development IDE EPP package and that's something I figure would come out of the DSDP Packaging project if it ever gets off the ground.

    Doug.

    On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 9:14 AM, Oberhuber, Martin <Martin.Oberhuber@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
    PS DSF is also missing in Galileo.

    DSF and RemoteCDT missing are regressions compared to Ganymede, where they have been in...

    Cheers,
    --
    Martin Oberhuber, Senior Member of Technical Staff, Wind River
    Target Management Project Lead, DSDP PMC Member
    http://www.eclipse.org/dsdp/tm



      From: cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Oberhuber, Martin
      Sent:
      Montag, 11. Mai 2009 15:10
      To:
      CDT General developers list.
      Subject:
      [cdt-dev] CDT and Galileo

      Dear CDT gurus,

      I just tried to get "All of Galileo M7" and noticed some missing from CDT:
        • Mylyn CDT connector missing in Galileo -- should be in "Collaboration" category
        • RemoteCDT Launcher missing in Galileo -- should be in "Device Development" category
      Or are these deliberately not in Galileo?

      Thanks,
      --
      Martin Oberhuber, Senior Member of Technical Staff, Wind River
      Target Management Project Lead, DSDP PMC Member
      http://www.eclipse.org/dsdp/tm


    _______________________________________________
    cdt-dev mailing list

    cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
    https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev



    _______________________________________________
    dsdp-pmc mailing list

    dsdp-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
    https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/dsdp-pmc
_______________________________________________
cdt-dev mailing list
cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev

GIF image

GIF image

GIF image


Back to the top