On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 3:15 AM, Eric Rizzo <eclipse-mail@xxxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:eclipse-mail@xxxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
I wonder what impact this decision would have on the likelihood of
getting Salvo into Helios (Eclipse 3.6 release)...
Seems like if it doesn't make it into the Helios packages, the hope
of it being a tool for engaging Average Joe User is greatly diminished.
Eric
Wim Jongman wrote:
Not quite sure what you mean by 'ownership'. You would (of
course)
have whatever copyright you wanted in the code, and this is the
ultimate notion of 'ownership' with EPL-licensed codebases (any
Eclipse project). Further, I would propose moving you toward
committer status (on ECF project), and then you would be the
primary
committer maintainer of this/these bundles.
Are you (Wim) already a committer on some other EF project?
If so,
which one(s)? I don't expect it would be a big hassle to add
you as
an ECF committer, but I and the other exisitng committers
would need
a little bit more familiarity with your work before we can/could
reasonably vote you in as an ECF committer. But that means
looking
at your code...
Yes, with ownership I mean being able to work on the code and to
get one or two ppl people in quickly to work on this as well. I
am not an Eclipse committer. I don't mind that you look at the
code but I don't want to attach it to a bug. I suggest to make a
svn repo available and mail the credentials.
Since almost all requirements have been met to make it a
standalone technology project wouldn't it be better for
now to
follow that route instead.
No, I don't really agree. From your point of view, as a
separate/new project you will have to deal with all the EF
project
requirements essentially on your own (e.g. the reviews, creating
your own build infrastructure, going from incubation to
non-incubation status, IP process, etc., etc). We (ECF) already
have all this in place, have gone through it, and can reuse what
we've already done (e.g. build infrastructure). Also, there are
people like me (who've gone through it many times) to at
least help
do the IP and process stuff :).
Well strange as that might seem, I am actually very curious on
how all this is setup and I think doing all this will be a good
learning experience...
Further, from a technology perspective, much of what you have
in the
newsreader app (i.e. implementation of nntp protocol) is/would be
suitable for ECF, and ultimately belongs there IMHO. Also I
think
there are a number of things that we're already doing (e.g. IM,
shared editing, google wave integration, etc) that would be
naturally helpful/valuable for the newsreader app, and having
things
be in separate projects and under separate project teams will not
help with integration.
That is true. I think the fit in ECF is undisputed. and yes,
let's talk on skype. Sent me a good time for you.
