Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [tools-pmc] GEF Incubator Proposal

Hi Ian,

It is pretty hard to judge your request without clear requirements for who wants these features. Are there any Bugzillas or pointers to customers for these features? I would really like to see more elaboration on the feature benefits, particularly for the Eclipse members, companies who are supporting our efforts.

I am going to take a stab at these, but I agree with Doug and I am not seeing an incubator is required.

dot4zest ; I think this was a Google summer of code project for 2009, so the work is done? This work looks to me like a GEF example. Can we not raise a CQ and put this into GEF as an example or perhaps the Eclipse examples project?

Next Generation Zest API : I do not understand why this needs to be in an incubator. This was work we planned for Helios and since we are past M5 it is not going to happen. I want to push back on this item a little more. If the current API does not work, then the new API needs to be elaborated within the existing Zest component with the community and not in an incubator.

Advanced Editing Concepts: these look to me like GEF / Draw2D features that can be contributed using Bugzilla / CQ and incorporated in GEF.

Lightweight Notation Model : No for models in GEF :-). We have an Eclipse modeling project and you should be working with the GMF project in particular for the notational metamodel. You should be aware that the GMF notational metamodel is pretty much the defacto standard at eclipse and is the basis for notation and diagram interchange at the OMG.

An additional note here is that there is tremendous opportunity to add several new GEF committers as a result of this work. For me personally, this is the biggest reason why I do not want a GEF incubator and you have not been the first person to ask (and you have asked before). If the community wants to add features to GEF/Draw2D/Zest that is awesome. As part of this commitment, I also want the new contributors to also buy into becoming committers and supporting their work long term for the Eclipse community.

Let me know if I am out of line on any of these.

Anthony Hunter mailto:anthonyh@xxxxxxxxxx
Software Development Manager
IBM Rational Software: Aurora / Modeling Tools
Phone: 613-270-4613

Inactive hide details for Ian Bull ---2010/02/03 08:57:08 AM---I don't know, that's a good question. I thought that incubators Ian Bull ---2010/02/03 08:57:08 AM---I don't know, that's a good question. I thought that incubators provided a number of advantages for new projects and new ideas


Ian Bull <irbull@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>


Tools PMC mailing list <tools-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx>


2010/02/03 08:57 AM


Re: [tools-pmc] GEF Incubator Proposal

I don't know, that's a good question.  I thought that incubators provided a number of advantages for new projects and new ideas, such as:
    • Parallel IP
    • Pre 1.0 (wrt to API)
    • A clear indication to early adopters of what to expect
I don't have a problem with creating this work as a sub component of GEF, although some of this work is clearly "incubation" style work (new ideas with undefined API that will hopefully graduate -- but that will depend on the quality and demand of the work being done).

Anthony, as the GEF lead, what do you tihnk?


On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 10:20 PM, Doug Schaefer <cdtdoug@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

R. Ian Bull | EclipseSource Victoria | +1 250 477 7484 |
tools-pmc mailing list

GIF image

GIF image

Back to the top