RE: [eclipse-dev] Combo packages proposal

[Jeff McAffer <Jeff_McAffer@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Combining all of the drops in one is
technically feasible.  We started out down that path and it is done
in some product scenarios I believe.  There are a few challenges.
 For example, there is only one root directory.  There would
be name conflicts for the "eclipse" executable on non Windows
platforms.  The main hurdle is legal.  As I recall, there were
issues with delivering various third party libraries to platforms other
than the intended ones.  I'm not a lawyer and so cannot provide more
detail there.

Personally I would like this option.

My comment about being untested assumed
that the teams follow their own schedules etc and just contribute zips
which are trivially repackaged into the uber-package.  Doing one mondo
unified build does not work as various teams use different build and test
technology plus a build already takes about 4 hours.  Lengthening
that would severely impact our ability to do milestones using continuous
builds to cover all our timezones etc.  The Eclipse releng team does
not have the resources (human, machine or temporal) to play that role.

Jeff

"Ed Burnette" <Ed.Burnette@xxxxxxx>
Sent by: eclipse-dev-admin@xxxxxxxxxxx

02/12/2004 10:04 PM

Please respond to
eclipse-dev

To	<eclipse-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
cc
Subject	RE: [eclipse-dev] Combo packages proposal

Jeff McAffer wrote:
> - We'd need 1+GB more disk space *per build* (on our server plus the
mirrors) 

What would happen if you put all the os/ws fragments in a single sdk download
and the user unpacked them all into the eclipse directory? Would each system
pick out the right fragment at run-time? That would cut your download server
space by a factor of 5 at least. Also it would help address some feedback
I got at EclipseCon where somebody was having trouble making a multi-platform
install because it would give them the pieces for all the systems. The
down side is it would increase the sdk download size by about 15M. 

> Note also that the content of the uber-package would never have been
> tested since it is part of the build and by definition the things
that
> are added in are added to an Eclipse that was just built. 

Why would it have to be untested? PDE, for example, is part of the build,
added to an Eclipse platform that was just built so what's the difference
between that and, say, EMF?

For another example, when the web tools project is going, I'd definitely
want to see it on the same automated build schedule and test regimen as
the Platform components. Life's too short for "when will it work with
M7" kinds of questions. :)
_______________________________________________
eclipse-dev mailing list
eclipse-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe
from this list, visit
http://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse-dev