-----Original Message-----
From: dsdp-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:dsdp-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Russo, David
Sent: Donnerstag, 28. Mai 2009 21:39
To: DSDP PMC list
Subject: [dsdp-pmc] pending RTSC CQ's: [CQ 3269] and [CQ 3270]
Team,
The RTSC project has two outstanding CQ's that require PMC approval
(or not):
3269 Mozilla Rhino Version: 1.6R6 (PB CQ1694)
https://dev.eclipse.org/ipzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3269
3270 antlr Version: 3.1.1
https://dev.eclipse.org/ipzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3270
The rhino dependency is a simple piggyback while the antlr is a minor
update to existing antlr CQ's. Rhino provides the JavaScript
interpreter used to run RTSC meta-domain modules and Antlr is used by
RTSC to generate the IDL parser.
The CQ's above are key to the RTSC project and are pending PMC
approval. Please vote.
Thanks,
dave
-----Original Message-----
From: Russo, David
Sent: Thursday, May 07, 2009 10:22 AM
To: 'DSDP PMC list'
Subject: RE: [dsdp-pmc] [CQ 3272] java tar Version: 2.5
Doug and team,
The following CQs are outstanding:
3269 Mozilla Rhino Version: 1.6R6 (PB CQ1694)
3270 antlr Version: 3.1.1
3271 xmlbeans Version: 1.0.4
3272 java tar Version: 2.5
The first two are, in my opinion, uncontroversial and I'd advocate a
+1 for these.
I'd appreciate the team's comments on the others. I've tried to
fairly represent the issues below.
3271: xmlbeans 2.3 is already approved, but our tests with Rhino
(which requires xmlbeans for its E4X support) work with
1.0.4 and break with 2.3. The RTSC team needs to spend time to
determine the root cause and possibly work around the issue in our use
of Rhino. My preference is to get 1.0.4 approved to avoid
destabilizing RTSC (it's likely a problem between Rhino and xmlbeans
that the RTSC team may never fully understand), but I understand the
community desire to piggyback on the already approved xmlbeans 2.3.
3272: Martin rightly pointed out that several other projects in
eclipse already embed tar support. The "cleanest" appears to be the
tar support in ant.jar, but this jar is 1.3M compared to 25K for java
tar. java tar 2.5 is public domain, small, and sufficient for RTSC
needs. Moreover, we are under considerable pressure to reduce
XDCtools footprint. So, I see three options:
1. push for java tar to be approved;
2. subset ant.jar, taking only the tar support and any of it's
prerequisites; or
3. copy tar support from other projects into RTSC.
I strongly prefer to take pre-built solutions and hate cut-copy-paste
coding, so #3 is a last resort. Even #2 worries me from a maintenance
point of view. Subseting someone else's distribution requires work
that can easily be undone by a simple update of the original
distribution and, as a rule, the RTSC team avoids doing this.
On the other hand, this seems to be what other eclipse projects do. I
see this being done with ANTLR (which surprised me) so perhaps I
should do the same with ant? Is it common practice to subset other
open-source distributions to create a custom set of jars within
eclipse?
Since java tar 2.5 is small, self-contained and we could reuse its
binary distribution, I opted for #1 above.
If you've read this far, I'd appreciate any comments or guidance you
may have.
dave
-----Original Message-----
From: dsdp-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:dsdp-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Gaff, Doug
Sent: Thursday, May 07, 2009 6:16 AM
To: DSDP PMC list
Subject: RE: [dsdp-pmc] [CQ 3272] java tar Version: 2.5
Hi Dave,
Please send a summary email for all of your open CQ's that the PMC
needs to vote on. We can vote on all of them and then reference the
vote in the CQ's.
Doug
-----Original Message-----
From: dsdp-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:dsdp-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of emo-ip-team@xxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Wednesday, May 06, 2009 5:15 PM
To: dsdp-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [dsdp-pmc] [CQ 3272] java tar Version: 2.5
http://dev.eclipse.org/ipzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3272
Barb Cochrane <barb.cochrane@xxxxxxxxxxx> changed:
What |Removed |Added
--------------------------------------------------------------
----------
----
CC|
|barb.cochrane@xxxxxxxxxxx
AssignedTo|emo-ip-team@xxxxxxxxxxx
|barb.cochrane@xxxxxxxxxxx
--- Comment #7 from Barb Cochrane <barb.cochrane@xxxxxxxxxxx>
2009-05-06 17:13:38 ---
Hi David,
This one is waiting for PMC vote on it as well.
Thanks.
Auto-Generated Text: IPTeam awaiting response from PMC.
--
Configure CQmail:
http://dev.eclipse.org/ipzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC
list for the CQ.
_______________________________________________
dsdp-pmc mailing list
dsdp-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/dsdp-pmc
_______________________________________________
dsdp-pmc mailing list
dsdp-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/dsdp-pmc
_______________________________________________
dsdp-pmc mailing list
dsdp-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/dsdp-pmc
