Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [emf-dev] EMF Query2 release

A Restructuring Review will do here as we are actually splitting a project in two.

Prior to the review, I need to receive an IP Log for the entire project. This should be relatively easy to generate [1]. I also require some review documentation. That documentation needs to provide details of the move. What will move and to where. Since we're creating a new project as part of this, the documentation will have to include the name of the new project, description of the project, scope, list of committers, etc.

I assume that we'll start the new project in the mature phase since it's been around for a while. Let me know if anybody feels that it should be started in incubation. In that case, we'll need to identify mentors.

The project proposal template may be useful as a basis for this documentation [2]. The preamble may need to be changed a bit. Don't go overboard on the documentation. We just need enough information to let the community know what's going on.

You might want to give the "Starting a new Project" page [3] a once-over to make sure you know what you're getting into :-)




On 06/28/2011 05:50 AM, Saurav Sarkar wrote:
Hi Wayne,
Ok then if everyone agrees we would like to go for the restructuring review.
Since we are doing it for the first time, could you please let us know how should we go about conducting the same.
I checked this page
Anything else do i need to provide apart from the information asked in the link ?

On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 7:59 PM, Anthony Hunter <anthonyh@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi Wayne,

A short history lesson is in order:

IBM maintained EMF Query since its inception.
EMF Query is a very small project, so three years ago we only had one IBM committer on the project Christian Damus.
Christian Damus left Eclipse and IBM in March 2009, so EMF Query was left with no committers.
In an effort to increase the number of committers on the three EMF projects Christian maintained, SAP and IBM added new committers to the projects and SAP became the project lead
Bernd Kolb became the project lead for EMF Query.
Over time, the SAP committers contributed a component EMF Query2 into the EMF Query project. This was meant to be the 2.0 of EMF Query.

There is no breakdown in our processes, the committers on EMF Query worked on a new version of EMF Query and calling it EMF Query2 with a separate name space so to not break existing users.

The only breakdown was getting the two components to release for Indigo. That is why I suggested separating them.

So I would agree to just make EMF Query 2 a separate project.

From:         Wayne Beaton <emo@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To:         Ashwani Sharma <ashw.kumar@xxxxxxxxx>,
Cc:         Anthony Hunter/Ottawa/IBM@IBMCA, Eclipse Modelling Framework <emf-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date:         06/18/2011 11:32 PM
Subject:         Re: [emf-dev] EMF Query2 release

The first step is that you (i.e. the project leadership and committers) need to determine what the moving forward plan is.

Frankly, the more that I look at this the more concerned I am that the EDP is not being followed by the project.
  • The EMF website lists EMF Query 2 as if it were already a project.
  • EMF Query 2 is distributing a "2.0" despite being incubation (incubating project can only release pre 1.0). For that matter, the 2.0.0 release looks totally official (other than the 'N' in the build number, there's no indication on the downloads page that this is a milestone build).
  • AFAIK, EMF Query 2 has not done a single review of any kind.
In short, EMF Query 2 is like a phantom project.

Clearly, there has been a huge breakdown in our processes and I'd like to understand how it happened so that we can fix it.

I am sensitive to your release concerns, and am willing to help fix this. But it needs to be fixed.

How do we proceed? Based on previous assertions that EMF Query is still being used by other folks and will persist for the foreseeable future, combined with the apparently completely separate development teams, code base, and release schedule, I'm inclined to recommend that we schedule an immediate restructuring review in which we can just make EMF Query 2 a separate project. Then EMF Query can decide its own fate.

If this sound right to everybody, we can discuss next steps. We can schedule this restructuring review for June 23-29; best case scenario is that we may be able to do a release review two weeks or so later. Assuming all the pieces fall into place.



On 06/18/2011 10:21 PM, Ashwani Sharma wrote:

We are getting more questions internally in SAP and in newsgroups about release of EMF Query2. If we don't make a proper release, we might loose interest.
Can you please suggest how do you want to take the assessment ?

Ashwani Kr Sharma

On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 8:48 AM, Ashwani Sharma < ashw.kumar@xxxxxxxxx > wrote:
Hi Anthony,

How should we do this assessment ?
Will you give EMF Query2 a try ? Will you have sometime before indigo release for this ?

Ashwani Kr Sharma

On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 10:21 PM, Wayne Beaton < emo@xxxxxxxxxxx > wrote:
The assessment that Anthony is referring to is not an EDP concept. I
believe that means an assessment of the impact of the change on the
community. This is something that is best done by the project itself. I
am willing to assist, but the project is the ultimate authority on its
community and the impact of change.

Some thoughts...

Strictly speaking, "EMF Query 2" is not currently a separate entity from
the EDP point of view. Strictly speaking, code from "EMF Query 2" should
be released using the same version numbering scheme and on single
project-wide schedule. The fact that different build systems are used,
and that different groups of developers--managed via social
convention--is interesting, but not relevant.

Allowing EMF Query 2 to make a separate release using a different
version number while still part of the EMF Query project requires an
exception to the process.

Before I can grant that exception, or permit the creation of a separate
project as part of a restructuring review, I need to better understand
the going forward plan.


On 06/06/2011 11:47 AM, Ashwani Sharma wrote:
> >> Is there a continuity story between the frameworks?
> The new framework is not at all compatible with previous. It will
> require users to re-write their queries.
> If everyone agrees, i can plan for assessment or review. I will need
> details on how to do it, since this is first time for me :)

Wayne Beaton
The Eclipse Foundation
Twitter: @waynebeaton

emf-dev mailing list

_______________________________________________ emf-dev mailing list emf-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx

Wayne Beaton
The Eclipse Foundation
Twitter: @waynebeaton

Back to the top