Re: [tools-pmc] Move of Terminal and Remote TM to CDT

[David Williams <david_williams@xxxxxxx>]

No objection.

But, will point out if CDT committers could "keep it alive" then why can't they simply become committers in TM and do the work there (and, I'm guessing, move (o.e.remote to TM).
I think there are other consumers of 'remote' and 'terminal' (such as the JEE EPP package) so wouldn't you need to keep a separate build? Oh, just realized you would not have to for EPP packages,
as long as there is a "simultaneous release" :) but you might think through if there are any other consumers that might need it on a different schedule that CDT.

Plus, in Eclipse "main" releases, such as those participating in Simultaneous Release, is there still just one "remote" and one "terminal"? I thought some of the TM re-org/termination issues came up because someone was doing something similar? But, it is a vague memory -- I have not researched the history.

Good luck! (sounds complicated)


On 08/30/2017 04:17 PM, Doug Schaefer wrote:

Hey gang,

 

There is a current request, https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=500768, which has the intention of bring the org.eclipse.remote target management system and the Terminal plug-ins together under a single project. The idea is to make Terminal the official terminal for o.e.remote connections, and make o.e.remote the standard (but not only) connection technology for the Terminals.

 

My fear is that the originally proposed home in the TM project is about to collapse. As such, I’d like to bring them under the CDT umbrella. C/C++ developers these days deal mainly with remote systems, either embedded development boards or big iron servers. Target Management has always been a desired feature of the CDT (we even had a proposal at one time to build such a system until DSDP came along and that’s a good story on its own). IMHO, it’s time to bring target management home and give it and CDT some much needed energy.

 

My proposal as listed on the bug is to bring the two git repos and all related artifacts for these components under the ownership and responsibility of the CDT. We still need to reach agreement with the projects involved, but before I do that, I’d like to see if anyone on the Tools PMC objects.

 

Thanks!

Doug.