[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Are project dependencies required to participate in Luna?

Election as project lead will require a +1 from the other two project committers. If you're in contact with them, the election process will be over as soon as they both vote. Theoretically, you could make this happen in time for M4.

However, there's no need. The project has already stated intent to participate, so deferring the change in leadership until the new year is fine.

I recommend updating the name of the 0.7 release to 1.0 (just change the name on the existing record, don't create a new one).

At some point, BPMN2 needs to move out of MDT. It'd be nice to have that happen with the graduation, but the whether or not it's required is a matter between the project and the Modeling PMC. FWIW, the Modeling PMC has marked that container project for termination [1].

Thanks,

Wayne

[1] http://wiki.eclipse.org/Modeling/project_termination_review_2012

On 12/16/2013 10:33 AM, Bob Brodt wrote:
Hi David,

Wow, that's a lot of "ifs" "ands" and/or "buts" ;)

Here's the story: the BPMN2 metamodel project is just an EMF model that implements the OMG specification for BPMN 2.0. Given that this spec hasn't changed since 2011, the eclipse BPMN2 project hasn't had to change either (with the exception of a few minor "tweaks").

I've already been in touch with the project lead (Reiner Hille-Doering at SAP) and he, unfortunately, hasn't the time to maintain this project any longer, so we've decided the best course of action would be for me to take on the project lead role. But, since there isn't really enough time to go through the formal project leadership transfer before the Luna M4 deadline, we've decided to wait until after the holidays to do this (I don't know about SAP, but Red Hat shuts down during the last 2 weeks of December.)

I'm perfectly fine with taking the MDT BPMN2 project through the "1.0 release" graduation process and moving it to wherever it makes sense, if you feel that's the best thing, but I know that the project is being used independently of the BPMN2 Modeler by members of the Eclipse community, and I don't want to cause these members undue stress.

@Wayne, what do you think?

Bob


Can I clarify ... or, ask for clarification ...

Your (BPMN2 Modeler) plan is to use "as is" the "incubation release" from
https://projects.eclipse.org/projects/modeling.mdt.bpmn2/releases/0.7.0
which as made in 6/23/2010 [1], Â
and you have confirmed it meets all the "must do" requirements, which is what allows you to use it "as is".
If all that's true, that's fine .... but ...

Given that the one and only release was 3 years ago, that sort of sounds like there is not a lot of activity on that project, but haven't looked in code repo or anything.
Â
[I was not able to find who (if anyone) is a current committer or project lead, but assume they are aware of this plan and agree its ok ... ]

Just makes me wonder if it (the current subproject of MDT) should "move" to be a proper part of BPMN2 Modeler project?

You could still basically use "as is" if it suits your needs, but ... would give more opportunity to correct errors if any found ... and I am pretty sure there are some ... as the latest "repo report" [2] shows you both are missing some "about.html" files (I'm assuming "both" just going by version numbers of bundles).

Missing about.html in file: org.eclipse.bpmn2.edit_0.7.0.201308220617.jar
Missing about.html in file: org.eclipse.bpmn2.editor_0.7.0.201308220617.jar
Missing about.html in file: org.eclipse.bpmn2.modeler.help_1.0.2.201312131338.jar
Missing about.html in file: org.eclipse.bpmn2.modeler.wsil_1.0.2.201312131338.jar
Missing about.html in file: org.eclipse.bpmn2_0.7.0.201308220617.jar


Plus, given that BPMN2 Modeler has "graduated" from incubation, I think it gives you a chance to drive the "mdt" piece to graduation, give it a "1.0" version, so you do not have to "contaminate" any names/labels by putting "incubating" back in. Naturally, this means you really would/could maintain it, etc.

Just a suggestion.

Thanks

[1] http://www.eclipse.org/projects/project-plan.php?planurl=/modeling/mdt/bpmn2/project-info/plan_helios.xml
[2] http://build.eclipse.org/simrel/luna/reporeports/reports/layoutCheck.txt
Â




From: Â Â Â ÂWayne Beaton <wayne@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: Â Â Â ÂBob Brodt <bbrodt@xxxxxxxxxx>, cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx,
Date: Â Â Â Â12/13/2013 08:23 AM
Subject:    ÂRe: [cross-project-issues-dev] Are project dependencies required to    Âparticipate in Luna?
Sent by: Â Â Â Âcross-project-issues-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx




Yes, with some restrictions.

This captured in the FAQ.

http://wiki.eclipse.org/SimRel/Simultaneous_Release_Policy_FAQ

Wayne

On 12/13/2013 07:49 AM, Bob Brodt wrote:
Hi Wayne,

The BPMN2 Modeler project will be participating in the Luna release. This project depends on the MDT BPMN2 project which is currently not part of any release train. My question: is MDT BPMN2 also required to be part of Luna, and does it need to be included in the simrel aggregator?

________________________
Robert ("Bob") Brodt
Senior Software Engineer
JBoss by Red Hat




--
Wayne Beaton
Director of Open Source Projects,
The Eclipse Foundation
Learn about
Eclipse Projects
EclipseCon 2014_______________________________________________
cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev


_______________________________________________
cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev


--
Wayne Beaton
Director of Open Source Projects, The Eclipse Foundation
Learn about Eclipse Projects
EclipseCon
          2014

JPEG image

JPEG image