the point I tried to make with the wiki
is that it is an example of another company (LogicaCMD) that has plans
on doing contributions to the tool component. I also have discussions with
one more company that possibly could be involved in the tool component,
so there is hope that IBM will not continue to carry 100% of the workload
associated with the tool component.
No content development is done on the
Wiki, all content development is done through epf-dev, Bugzilla and CVS.
<A completely separate issue is that once the Wiki technology is open
sourced, it would provided us with a very good environment for allowing
contributions to the content, but since it is not open source, it is not
an official site for improving OpenUP or other future EPF content)
c) These figures do not fairly reflect actual contributions. ... <I
have a separate issues to deal with that some valuable team members should
committ their work and not work through others, but it does not mean that
they do not add value or are not involved>
Slide 20: "Several major organizations..." and
"Many organizations..." - I'd like to see a concrete list.
PKR: I could rapidly find 13 companies that add value to EPF. I think this
is just the tip of an iceberg... Every time I go to a conference, a new
company tells me that they are using EPF one way or the other...Also note
that that I do not have all companies listed that are supporters of EPF....
My concern with your answers above is the (c).
What you're saying is that your contributor community is larger
and diverse, but that your committer community is not. What can
you do/what plans do you have to convince those contributors to become
On c), I tried to make the point that
some COMITTERS are adding value only through bugzilla and epf-dev (since
a lot of content is originally written and augmented using Word, rather
than directly in EPF Composer), and I will work on these committers also
do committs directly through CVS. So, the committer community is large
and diverse, but some committers are not using CVS... especially this is
true for some non-IBMers.
In the IP log, see http://www.eclipse.org/epf/project-info/project_log.csv
you find a number of contributors. Some of them may soon be candidates
for becoming committers. I think we have a working process in place within
the project for making that happen.
STSM, Manager Methods: RUP / RMC
Project Lead: Eclipse Process Framework
Rational Software, IBM Corp
Bjorn Freeman-Benson <emo@xxxxxxxxxxx>
09/18/2006 06:21 PM
Re: [Fwd: Re: EPF reviews]
One more thing. The wiki you pointed us to (http://lcmglab.xs4all.nl/wikis/openup/)
is not at eclipse.org. What is it's relationship to the project?
Is content worked on at the wiki and then committed to CVS later?