| 
  
  
     05.09.2013 19:20,  John Arthorne wrote: 
     
    If Christian is interested in
          becoming a committer
          on this effort then it is very easy. If he is a committer, and
          he wrote
          100% of the code himself, he can commit it. Even if he is not
          a committer,
          we would just need to submit a CQ to get the code reviewed. If
          it is written
          100% by a single author, and the author is involved in the
          process, this
          is quite easy (but may cause some delay).
       
     
    I am interested to become a committer as I want to work actively on
    this project. So there should not be any problems with that. 
     
    That part you will need to resolve
          with Sharon and
          the rest of the IP team. If you actually want to *include*
          this code and
          it has uncertain history then it might become a blocker. If
          you want to
          make a dependency on it, where it is one of multiple scripting
          engines
          that you support, that is easier to deal with. Would it be
          possible at
          all to separate the Jython-specific piece from the rest of the
          code base
          or is it a fundamental part. In another Eclipse project I know
          a case where
          they host separate plugins/extensions that rely on "unclean"
          libraries in GitHub and host the rest of the project at
          Eclipse, for example.
       
       
     
     
    Currently 4 script languages are included in EScript: Rhino, Jython,
    Groovy and JRuby. 
    The Rhino bundle comes already as part of JSDT, so we have no IP
    problems with that. 
    For each of the other languages I currenty created a plugin
    containing eg the Jython interpreter. Integration in EScript is done
    by another plugin that depends on the script engine classes. For
    example we have an org.jython plugin and an
    ...escript.jython.interpreter plugin. The former may contain code
    where we need to clarify licensing issues the latter contains only
    code written by myself. 
     
    So I guess your second suggestion would work as we could put the
    engines plugins on github sites. On the long run it would of course
    be more convenient to host all necessary stuff within eclipse. 
     
     
     
     
      Making committers on e4 is very easy. We
          typically
          start an election as soon as they introduce themselves on the
          e4-dev mailing
          list. The election takes one week, and then in 1-2 more weeks
          it is all
          done.
       
       
     
     
    I'd say it would be far better to host all this in an e4 repository
    than starting a migration after some months. 
     
    As long as
          all the commits are from people who will be committers on the
          effort, it
          is easy to bring that work into Eclipse a bit later. 
       
     
     
    That seems to be the case so far. We might continue on github until
    we are ready to move to e4, but we should trigger an e4 setup for
    our project as soon as possible. 
     
    In the meantime it would be great to know which rules we should
    apply on commits, file headers and so on to make migration later on
    as smooth as possible. 
     
    Christian 
     
  
 |