[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
|
RE: [eclipse-pmc] Documenting dependencies on operatingsystems andJRE's
|
Perfectly prepared, as always - I bow to you, John
:)
+1 for going the path of least resistance and work on this
one, your list makes perfect sense.
Except I'm still surprised about QNX, it's neither a
reference platform nor on the list of ZIPs we build...
... and it's odd declaring a pre-req on J2SE-1.4 when the
current list of reference platforms does not
include any J2SE-1.4 one any more. Perhaps we should
continue running automated tests on ONE
J2SE-1.4 platform and declare that as reference
too?
Martin
Yes, I have had contact with the EMO
and they advised me to enter the CQ's. I don't just invent work for myself
;) I also don't see much point in
documenting the obvious and don't see the particular risk, but it seemed easier
to just enter a blanket CQ with this list than to debate it with them further.
We do have CQ's for specific windowing and browser libraries we invoke
such as GTK, Mozilla, etc, but we don't currently document our references to the
core operating system itself. Since it appears to be acceptable, I prefer just
saying a general dependency like "Windows XP" rather than further listing
specific OS libraries we invoke. I made the suggestion that they publish a list
of "pre-approved" exempt pre-requisites for the most obvious things (operating
systems, JREs), so that projects don't have this additional hoop to jump
through. I gathered the list below
from looking at our most recent integration build. I'm not attempting to capture
historical information, but just what we intend to reference in the Helios
release. John
"Oberhuber, Martin"
<Martin.Oberhuber@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent by: eclipse-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
01/20/2010 04:07 PM
|
Please respond
to
eclipse-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx |
|
|
To
| <eclipse-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx>
|
|
cc
|
|
|
Subject
| RE: [eclipse-pmc] Documenting
dependencies on operating systems
andJRE's |
|
Hi John, have you had contact with the EMO already regarding
this "documenting exempt pre-reqs" process? As per the policy you cited, the policy is only meant as a
"framework for interpretation". So before we go into great lengths entering CQ's
which are hard to keep exact, let's ensure we know what is really needed. I personally do not see much value
in documenting the obvious. For instance, in terms of the Linux kernel, do we
already document pre-reqs like X Window, GTK+, ... or, what was the last version of Eclipse that was actually
known to run on QNX? Where should
we start and where should we end?
In my understanding, the policy was made
to ensure that commercial adopters of Eclipse technology are not forced into downloading / bundling dubious
additional software that is nowhere documented. In terms of the OS and core UI libs, I do not see
such a risk. Martin
From: eclipse-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:eclipse-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of John
Arthorne
Sent: Wednesday, January 20, 2010 9:38 PM
To:
eclipse-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [eclipse-pmc] Documenting
dependencies on operating systems andJRE's
It has come to my
attention that we must enter CQ's for all dependencies on third party software
that we reference, including operating systems and JRE's [1]. I had previously
thought that exempt pre-reqs didn't require a CQ. Furthermore, the policy
says:
"These
discussions and decisions must occur transparently either via email on the
public PMC mailing list, or in the minutes of meetings distributed to the public
PMC mailing list."
I am writing this email to satisfy the above requirement. I would
like to declare an "exempt pre-req" dependency for the Eclipse project on the
following:
Windows (CE, XP, Vista, or 7)
Linux Kernel 2.6
Mac OS X 10.5 or greater
Sun Solaris 10 or greater
HPUX 11i v2 or
greater
IBM AIX 5.3
or greater
QNX
Photon
Java Runtime
Environment 1.4.2 or greater
Since the CQ deadline for Helios is Feb. 5th, I'd
like to submit a CQ for these as soon as possible. Please respond here with any
comments, concerns, additions, or corrections. If I hear no objections or
corrections before February 1st, I will assume all is well and I will enter the
CQ.
John
[1]
http://www.eclipse.org/org/documents/Eclipse_Policy_and_Procedure_for_3rd_Party_Dependencies_Final.pdf_______________________________________________
eclipse-pmc mailing
list
eclipse-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse-pmc
