Re: [tools-pmc] RESOLVED: Resuming the discussion on Object Teams?

[David M Williams <david_williams@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Stephan, I never saw the original email,
but I'll respond anyway, with a couple of words of advice to you and your
team. First, this is not a case where you can assume, "I talked ...
and no one objected". You should (pro)actively talk to JDT and gain
their understanding and explicit approval to (re)use their namespace. Second,
I was under the impression you were working on a document and working with
the Architecture Council to explain, educate, and convince the community
that it really was required that you (re)use the same namespace as the
JDT project for this exceptional case. Seems like a good idea to me. I
am assuming these activities would continue beyond M4 and beyond just "getting
in a build". Remember, the release review isn't until June 2011 ...
so, technically or strictly speaking, someone may object  up until
then or at that time. You'll want to be sure everyone is lined up with
you, to avoid any late surprises.  If you need help from the Tools
PMC, feel free to ask. But I think most of your initial discussions will
need to be with JDT and the Architecture Council. 

Thanks, 





From:      
 Stephan Herrmann <stephan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To:      
 Tools PMC mailing list
<tools-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date:      
 12/15/2010 03:20 AM
Subject:    
   [tools-pmc]
RESOLVED: Resuming the discussion on Object Teams?
Sent by:    
   tools-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx

---

Never mind my previous mail.

I didn't see that David had already re-enabled the Object Teams contribution
for Indigo. I have updated our contribution and all looks happy.

thanks,
Stephan

On Tuesday, December 14, 2010 05:08:30 pm Stephan Herrmann wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I'm not sure where and how I might resume the discussion about Object
Teams.
> 
> In https://bugs.eclipse.org/330534
the Equinox team gave excellent advice
> how to avoid 'accidental' installations of the JDT/Core patch (i.e.,
without 
> requesting the Object Teams feature).
> 
> In https://bugs.eclipse.org/330312
it was acknowledged that our case is a 
> rare exception for which no "thou shalt not" rules should
be carved in stone.
> 
> I've discussed the issue with the rest of the JDT/Core team and no-one
raised
> any objections.
> 
> I've tried to discuss this with few more people via email but didn't
get answers.
> 
> I started to document also where we access internal classes and where
we
> use bytecode weaving. 
> 
> 
> I'd still like our tool to join the train. And more importantly, I'm
preparing for
> a graduation review early next year.
> 
> If another in-depth discussion is needed to get approval, it's obviously
too late
> for M4. Would that mean it's too late for Indigo?
> 
> 
> I'd appreciate any advice on how I should proceed, thanks,
> Stephan
> 
_______________________________________________
tools-pmc mailing list
tools-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-pmc