Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [] some simrel projects that (may) need some attention

Thanks Ed for the chart and analysis tools.

An interesting thing to note is that Orbit is only directly in SimRel as a workaround to ensure that SimRel contains the most recent Orbit contents. While lots of bundles are pulled from Orbit in the SimRel build, that is because I put Orbit first in the list. Only four bundles are explicitly listed with comments as to why they need to be included.

Many of the "leaf" projects are indeed in EPP. On a quick count at least 9 of these 23 projects are in EPP.


Jonah Graham
Kichwa Coders

On Fri, 19 Nov 2021 at 00:21, Ed Merks <ed.merks@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

I'm working on analyzing the dependencies between the projects contributing to SimRel.  In the screen capture below, the font size is proportional to the number of incoming direct dependencies, also shown in the label:

Double clicking on a node, selects also the nodes that directly depend on it, e.g., XWT above has Papyrus as the only thing that depends on it.  It's a work in progress...

You need to not worry about ACTF's contribution because, although it is enabled,  its feature contributions are all filtered to Windows 32 bit which is not a supported configuration.  As such, none of IUs are actually on the train and the above graph shows no incoming nor outgoing dependencies.  You can confirm this by looking at the train's staging contents:

I strongly suggest we do not pull out any of the significant cards of this house at this late stage of the process because it's liable to come tumbling down.   If we're going to pull cards, we would be best to do that at the start of the process (in January), not at the end (during RC1).  The cards in the bottom two rows (0 incoming dependencies) could be pulled, but I've not analyzed the EPP dependencies on these SimRel contributions, so I can't say for sure that pulling any of those would have no impact on EPP.


On 18.11.2021 17:22, Wayne Beaton wrote:
Thanks for this Jonah.

I believe that the intentions expressed by the EGF project are clear: the project has left the simultaneous release and we need to remove the corresponding aggrcon file.

I'm not sure what to think about XWT and Papyrus. They are both just absent from the 2021-09 release, but are present on either side. They announced their intentions pretty clearly IMHO and nobody responded, so I guess that we just have to be okay with it. As I mentioned below, selectively dropping from a release is unprecedented and, frankly, I'm not sure what the implications are. The Planning Council should probably have some opinion on the matter.

Eclipse Data Tools bothers me. It feels like something that's going to blow up on us. As I stated below, it hasn't been updated in the simultaneous release for three years. There have, however, actually been a couple of updates in the project's repository.  Most recently (July 9), a committer pushed a fix "Master build is broken", but AFAICT the contribution to the simultaneous release has not changed. It looks like the two active committers actually made a few commits during that time frame, but -- again -- those changes have not been sponsored into the simultaneous release as of this writing.

It's not at all clear to me that anybody is testing the four year old Eclipse ACTF bits with the latest Platform drops. This worries me.

These are just the things that I noticed.


On Thu, Nov 18, 2021 at 10:07 AM Jonah Graham <jonah@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hello fellow Planning Council members,

Wayne's recent email about simrel participation highlighted some projects that may need a review in terms of participation full email is below, but these projects may need a review in regards to their participation:

- Eclipse Mylyn
- Eclipse EGF
- Eclipse XWT
- Eclipse Papyrus
- Eclipse Data Tools
- Eclipse ACTF

If anyone knows about or can tackle some of the above easily, please do so and let us know.


Jonah Graham
Kichwa Coders

---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Wayne Beaton <wayne.beaton@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2021 at 00:12
Subject: [cross-project-issues-dev] 2021-12 project participation
To: Cross project issues <cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>

Greetings Simultaneous Release Participants!

It's that time of the quarter again.

Please have a look at the participation page. If I have something wrong, please let me know. 

I've made my usual best guesses at what version of each project's software will be included in the 2021-12 simultaneous release. Based on what I see in the simrel repository, though, I think that a few of you need to create release records for your contributions.

If your project is pushing a new version and I have the wrong version selected, please ensure that you have created a release record with the correct version number and date. If that's in place, then please respond to this thread with the correct version information (or just send me a separate note).

If your project is contributing a major or minor release and has not engaged in a progress or release review within one year of the release date, then please engage the EMO ASAP to schedule a review.

Note that even if you do not need to engage in a progress or release review, you are responsible for ensuring that the intellectual property due diligence process has been completed for all of the contents of your release. If you have open CQs for content that will be included in the release, please reach out to emo-records@xxxxxxxxxxx to request that they expedite processing.

If you haven't yet, consider trying the Eclipse Dash License Tool to review the license state of your project's third party content.

Remember that you do not need to submit your IP Log for review if you are not engaging in a progress or release review. If you are uncertain about the status of your project's intellectual property, you can submit the IP Log with a comment requesting that the EMO review your project for conformance (when you submit an IP Log for review, the EMO will assume that you're initiating a release review unless you indicate otherwise).

I've noticed a few things...

Several Eclipse Mylyn features are disabled. Is this a problem? What is the status of this? It feels a little late to be asking this question, but will Eclipse Mylyn be updated in time to be included in the release?

Eclipse EGF dropped out starting with the 2021-09 release. Can/should somebody remove the aggrcon file?

Eclipse XWT and Eclipse Papyrus have been reactivated in the repository. In June, these projects "decided to opt out of the train for this release". To the best of my knowledge, opting out completely (that is, not contributing even old bits) of a release is unprecedented, so I'm not sure what (if anything) special needs to be done here. AFAICT, nobody from the Planning Council expressed any concerns in response to the declaration from the project teams, so I've added them back in. Please let me know if this is a problem. AFAICT there is no release record for Eclipse XWT that corresponds to this release.

There are some very old components in the simultaneous release. The Eclipse Data Tools features are, AFAICT, more than three years old. Eclipse ACTF is more than four years old. Are these features being tested? Is there anybody on this list representing the interests of these projects?

Thanks for your attention.


Wayne Beaton

Director of Open Source Projects | Eclipse Foundation

cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
To unsubscribe from this list, visit
_______________________________________________ mailing list
To unsubscribe from this list, visit


Wayne Beaton

Director of Open Source Projects | Eclipse Foundation

_______________________________________________ mailing list
To unsubscribe from this list, visit
_______________________________________________ mailing list
To unsubscribe from this list, visit

Back to the top