|Re: [eclipse.org-architecture-council] Impossible to find subset of "aggregated" CQs to piggy-back|
This is a major concern for all the science projects.
Jay Jay Billings
Team Lead, Scientific Software Development
Oak Ridge National Laboratory
Twitter Handle: @jayjaybillings
From: eclipse.org-architecture-council-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx <eclipse.org-architecture-council-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx> on behalf of Mickael Istria <mistria@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2018 2:39 AM
Subject: [eclipse.org-architecture-council] Impossible to find subset of "aggregated" CQs to piggy-back
I was about to open a lot of CQs for the typescript-language-server node module when a colleague (aka not some help from CQ submission portal) told me that Theia had a lot of node_modules approved already that I could piggy-back.
So he linked me to this CQ https://dev.eclipse.org/ipzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17349 and I could see this CQ gives IP approval to 954 node modules to piggy-back, including the typical language server stack. So I could happily piggy-back on this CQ for Wild Web Developer, happy end.
Now, let's imagine what would have happened if I hadn't this colleague to inform me at the right time: I'd have open a dozen of new CQs (one for each library I need) for libraries that library I need, resulting in a waste of effort/time for me and for the IP team. When submitting for one library, I would have typed the name in the initial "Name and version of the library" field and none would have matched the "Node.js dependencies for Theia" CQ, so they would have been new CQs instead of Piggy-Back.
I think we need to improve this to avoid useless efforts in the future.
What I suggest is that when an "aggregated" CQ is submitted, the list of included library gets resolved (like listed in first comment or in a dedicated field), and that this list is used to feed the search field on the new CQ questionnaire so someone who submits could find the aggregated CQ to piggy-back.
I'm bringing it to AC because I think it can easily become a concern for many projects, so it could be interesting for AC to track this issue.
But I guess at this point, I should open a bug, shouldn't I?
Back to the top