Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [] GIT layout

Ed, Adolfo,

either one of you or even both can/should now +1

as explained in

As suggested in I would find it useful if after successful setup of our new git repository we'd stick to a convention of opening branches for bugs named bug/nnn with nnn being the bug number. Given how easy it is with git to branch and merge, I really suggest we stick to this convention for each bug fix, if possible. I think it will make our work much more transparent.

-- Axel

On 06/06/2011 09:02 PM, Adolfo Sánchez-Barbudo Herrera wrote:
Ed, Axel,

1. The org.eclipse.mdt/org.eclipse.ocl.releng corresponds to old stuff.
It's even older than the previous athena based build system which was
used for Helios.
2. The helios releng stuff reside in
org.eclipse.mdt/org.eclipse.ocl/releng folder. Specifically, it
corresponds to every folder content excepting the following two subfolders:
- org.eclipse.ocl.releng.buckminster
3. The two subfolders above correspond to the the indigo releng stuff.

As the README.txt says, my intention was moving everything in
org.eclipse.mdt/org.eclipse.ocl/releng (excepting the two subfolders
above) into the following one:
- org.eclipse.mdt/org.eclipse.ocl/releng/org.eclipse.ocl.releng.athena

So my proposal for the releng restructure is the following:
- releng (a non project folder)
- org.eclipse.ocl.releng.athena (all the athena based releng stuff)
- org.eclipse.ocl.releng.buckminster (all the buckminster based stuff)
- (Our build director feature)
- README.txt

I'm not interested in the much older
org.eclipse.mdt/org.eclipse.ocl.releng, but for historical reason we
could create another org.eclipse.ocl.releng.XXXX project for it, where
I'm not sure what XXXX could be: ¿cbi ? ¿old?

P.D: an and will also appear.


El 06/06/2011 19:28, Ed Willink escribió:
Hi Axel

This should have migrated to from the outset.

If it was my choice:

Yes. I would put everything from org.eclipse.ocl.releng under

But, I have no experience of GIT, so I would certainly see what other
projects were doing.

And I would like to know what our diligent releng thinks.



On 06/06/2011 19:16, Axel Uhl wrote:
Ok, then what about directory structures? Shall everything from
org.eclipse.ocl.releng go straight under org.eclipse.ocl.git/releng?
If not, then where?

-- Axel

On 06/06/2011 08:11 PM, Ed Willink wrote:
Hi Axel

The rationale for a separate releng was to be able to have a
less-privileged committer who could not 'corrupt' the main code.

It has been very clear in the last month that the releng is the most
trusted committer, since releng must be able to commit without review,
so I see no need for a separate repository.



On 06/06/2011 19:03, Axel Uhl wrote:

what about org.eclipse.ocl.releng which currently resides next to
org.eclipse.ocl? Would you want its contents put under
gitroot/mdt/org.eclipse.ocl.git/releng? Or would you want a separate
git repository for that?

-- Axel

On 06/06/2011 06:24 PM, Ed Willink wrote:
Hi Axel

From looking at other projects: gef/mwe/xtext, I think we should be


In general, we seem to trail itemis for modern technology so it's
worth looking at Xtext.

I'm inclined to keep plugins etc the same just split off features.

Releng can be a sibling of plugins, but again first choice is the
as Xtext.



On 06/06/2011 17:13, Axel Uhl wrote:
I'm writing the git migration mail later tonight (currently seeing a
doctor for a sore knee). You should decide about repo structure.
Should it be under gitroot/mdt/org.eclipse.ocl to prepare for the
migration of other mdt projects?

Should we stay with examples, plugins, tests for now? Where
should the
relent stuff go.

Once we've decided, we open a bug for git migration so the webmaster
can perform repository creation and initial import.

-- Axel
Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

Ed Willink <ed@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:


Sorry. I download the Update site ZIP from Hudson and then do
New Software from it. Then Help Contents ...

Are we ready to go on GIT. Do I need to request a repository?



On 06/06/2011 16:49, Axel Uhl wrote:
> What about my first question ("what's the easiest and fastest
way to
> review the docs?")? I've currently an Indigo RC2 installed into
> I can't seem to update the latest nightly build of OCL for some
> dependency problem. Please advise.
> -- Axel
> On 6/6/2011 5:40 PM, Ed Willink wrote:
>> Hi Axel
>> Sorry, only just got back from work.
>> Obviously everything's good for a review. The top level stuff is
>> important since that's wha
newbies see. I highlighted the '2 Eclipses'
>> section as something that was more than 'facts'.
>> Regards
>> ed
>> On 06/06/2011 12:24, Axel Uhl wrote:
>>> Ed,
>>> what's the easiest and fastest way to review the docs? I may
>>> about an hour before 16:30 to review some stuff. Which part
>>> the most attention?
>>> -- Axel
>>> On 6/6/2011 10:23 AM,bugzilla-daemon@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>>>> Product/Component: MDT / OCL
>>>> --- Comment #27 from Edward Willink<ed@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>> 04:23:13 EDT ---
Created attachment 197373
>>>> -->
>>>> Delegates and Partial OCLstdlib syntax documentation


No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - <>
Version: 10.0.1382 / Virus Database: 1511/3683 - Release Date:

_______________________________________________ mailing list

Open Canarias, S.L.
	*Adolfo Sánchez-Barbudo Herrera*
C/Elías Ramos González, 4, ofc. 304
Tel.: +34 922 240231

_______________________________________________ mailing list

Back to the top