Skip to main content

Notice: this Wiki will be going read only early in 2024 and edits will no longer be possible. Please see: https://gitlab.eclipse.org/eclipsefdn/helpdesk/-/wikis/Wiki-shutdown-plan for the plan.

Jump to: navigation, search

Difference between revisions of "Eclipse/PMC"

(→‎Meeting Minutes)
(88 intermediate revisions by 5 users not shown)
Line 8: Line 8:
 
= Meeting Schedule =
 
= Meeting Schedule =
  
−
The [http://www.eclipse.org/eclipse/team-leaders.php Eclipse Project PMC] has a weekly phone meeting '''every wednesday at 10.30am EST'''.
+
The [http://www.eclipse.org/eclipse/team-leaders.php Eclipse Project PMC] has a weekly phone meeting '''every Wednesday at 10.30am EST'''.
  
 
= Meeting Minutes =
 
= Meeting Minutes =
  
−
'''May 7, 2014''' - McQ, Dani, Alex, John, Martin
+
'''September 30, 2015''' - McQ, John, Alex, Dani
−
* Martin {{bug|241957}} - GTK clipboard hang
+
* Dani: will send a note to PMC list asking to approve new Debug leadership (Sarika)
−
** Alex: GTK guys recommended using the async API, but no time for more investigation
+
* Dani: we should finalize our API removal discussion from last week
−
** McQ: Switching a sync API to async implementation underneath can be extremely messy (need to be aware of all possible events and event sources...)
+
** agreed that APIs marked for removal have to be annotated with @noreference
−
** McQ: If there is an idea canceling the clipboard wait ... given that the issue occurs only rarely, even a hacky solution is better than nothing
+
** agreed that components should be allowed to remove API but they have to provide good reasons
−
* Dani: will do a plan update, hopefully this week
+
** agreed that we won't allow to delete APIs simply because they are deprecated
 +
** agreed that the PMC will decide case by case i.e. there will be no general rule
 +
** regarding version numbering we decided to also decide this case by case
 +
** Dani to update the removal document and have it reviewed by the PMC
  
 
<hr/>
 
<hr/>
−
'''April 30, 2014''' - Dani, Martin, McQ
+
 
−
* McQ: '''WB4 perspective customization''' - has it caused any issues ?
+
'''September 23, 2015''' - Dani, John, Alex, Martin
−
** Martin: Dealing with detached views works differently (dragging a window fails - must drag the tab inside the window)
+
* Dani: '''JDT Core''' - Co-lead going to step up
−
** Dani: Saved perspectives / windows are lost on an existing workspace when moving from 3.x to 4.x
+
* Dani: '''API Removal Discussion'''
−
*** Martin/McQ: When crossing the major version boundary, it is OK to lose state - it's not nice but acceptable
+
** Q1: When do we actually delete API? What's the benefit compared to the pain that we cause ?
−
** Dani: The bigger problem is, that the whole "Perspective customization" dialog is still not working as expected
+
*** Example of methods that don't do anything any more or do wrong things -- those should be removed
−
*** Martin: Agree with the concern, but the Perspective customization dialog wasn't ever great
+
*** Example TableTreeViewer : Continue having the API doesn't hurt, there's no significant benefit removing it
−
*** McQ: If invest work here, rather make it good than bring back the previous status quo
+
**** Alex: TableTree was completely broken on GTK for 2-3 years ... keeping such components that don't work properly lowers the quality
−
*** Martin: Most customization done via plugin.xml / Java , don't expect end users to do a lot of customization themselves
+
**** Dani: Is there actual proof of bugs ? Or could it be working fine on Windows RCP ? If it's deprecated, people use it at own risk; do we really need to break them, if it provides value to some people on some Platforms ?
−
* Dani: '''M7 status'''
+
**** John: In TableTreeViewer case, EMF had some generic code (was unclear if the path was ever taken) and CDT could update easily
−
** Defect triage under control - some items deferred to 4.5
+
*** '''Summary''': scheduling for removal is OK with good arguments. Give Adopters a chance to respond before removal takes place.
 +
 
 +
** Q2: '''How to deal with the versions?'''
 +
*** Dani: Updating the major causes major pain on everyone (adoption work), so this should be avoided
 +
**** Actively developed plugins will notice source breakage when recompiling anyways -- no need to update the major for them.
 +
**** For dormant plugins (not recompiled), everyone will break when updating the major although only few may be affected - is it worth notifying those small percentage that might break ?
 +
**** Plugins who don't care recompiling may have to live with ClassNotFoundException
 +
**** Tooling exists: API Use Scan Tools can discover incorrect API references that are not announced by the versions
 +
*** '''Summary:''' Handle the Major with care -- in most cases, the cost of updating the major is not justified by the benefit.
 +
 
 +
** John: '''Announcement''' When thinking about removing something, we should announce that far and wide and ask for feedback
 +
*** Martin: But which channel is as effective as actually removing it ? There's always who don't actually listen...
 +
*** John: Still, giving a possibility to listen is important. Agree that mentioning in the release docs is not enough.
 +
*** Dani: When making a release, also send message with a link to the removals page (for all removals that are planned)
 +
** John: Mechanisms for maintaining binary compatibility while only breaking source compatibility (but it's a lot of work!)
 +
*** Dani: Agree, in this case better just leave it in there
 +
 
 +
** Alex: What to do next time, can we remove more stuff ?
 +
*** Martin: Should be at the discretion of the committers. They do the work. If they see the need for removal, they should be allowed to do so (as long as they play by the rules, like early announcement). Need to define what the rules are.
 +
 
 +
** John: There was an interesting discussion on cross-project, asking for well-known points in time where major breakage can occur
 +
*** Eg release but without all the deprecated at certain well-known point in time eg every 3-5 years
 +
*** '''AI''' ''continue that discussion on the Architecture Council''
 +
 
 +
** '''Summary:''' Essentially do what we did, plus more communication upfront, allow people to respond before deletion happens (to avoid churn)
 +
*** Committers still need to be able to delete stuff when they find it necessary.  
 +
*** Updating the major (or not) to be decided case by case, but in many cases "breaking everyone" is not justified against "notifying few dormant plugins".
 +
 
 +
* Alex: '''Bumping the minimum GTK version again''' (may cause issues on Platforms like AIX -- to be discussed when it's time)
  
  
 
<hr/>
 
<hr/>
−
'''April 23, 2014''' - McQ, Dani, John, Alex, Martin
+
'''September 16, 2015''' - John, Martin
−
* Alex - GTK2 or GTK3 as default - GTK3 it is
+
* John: '''API Removal Discussion'''
−
** GTK2 - more stable on old systems but no usable browser due to
+
** No urgency now -- changes have been reverted for now, and scheduled for 2017
−
*** xulrunner - latest version not supported by swt and latest distros don't even ship standalone xulrunner
+
** Updating the major of a bundle knowingly breaks everyone/most adopters
−
*** webkitgtk - gtk2 version in maintenance mode, upstream consider dropping, really crashy See [https://lists.webkit.org/pipermail/webkit-gtk/2014-March/001821.html]
+
*** In the past, breaking changes have often been small enough to work without increasing the major
−
** GTK3 still has some drawing issues (fighting them one by one, but functionally everything is there)
+
*** One can argue that removing TableTreeViewer is big enough to warrant updating the major
−
** McQ: If neither state is really good, need to choose the option that's moving forward (switch to GTK3)
+
** Versioning packages has not been done in the past due to the huge upcoming maintenance effort when starting to do so
−
* Dani - '''Freeze Plan created'''
+
** "Release Version" is decoupled from "bundle versions" already (and may move to date-based versions eg "2016.1" with rolling updates moving forward
−
* John - '''Hackathon in London proposed by Ian Skerret'''
+
** --&gt; will have more discussion next week
−
*
+
  
 
<hr/>
 
<hr/>
−
'''April 16, 2014''' - Dani, Alex
+
'''September 9, 2015''' - Dani, Alex, Martin, John, McQ
−
* no topics today
+
* John: '''Planning Council Updates'''
 +
** 4 planned releases (March, June, September, December -- essentially end of each quarter) with flexible contents
 +
** Mid December rather than end to avoid churn, so this one is a little shorter
 +
** Only June is "major" - allowing to drop off, or breaking changes; others are "minor"
 +
** McQ want to reduce the number of simultaneous streams -- if "master" is more stable more often that's OK, but avoid too many "live" streams
 +
 
 +
* Software is getting more important - would be good to better support multicore
 +
 
 +
* John: '''IntelliJ change in licensing / sales model'''
 +
** Many eclipse-positive comments on the announcement blog
 +
** Possibility putting Money on Eclipse Development may become interesting for companies in this context
  
 
<hr/>
 
<hr/>
−
'''April 9, 2014''' - Dani, Martin, Alex
+
'''September 2, 2015''' - Dani, Alex, Martin, John
−
* Dani - '''Kepler SR2 and Java 8'''
+
* Dani: '''EclipseDay India''' on Saturday, 200 attendees wanted to join, hat to cut to 150
−
** Planning Council: Can build and host the patches, but messaging must be clear as "SR2 with the patches applied". Still polishing words of the download pages.
+
** Keynote by Mike Milinkovich - large Community
−
** Not added to aggregate repo ... one-time package without any updates
+
 
−
** Feature patch available on Marketplace (for manual update) - for those starting from scratch they can now get "Kepler + Patch"
+
* Dani: '''Policy for and Mars.2'''
−
** Not convinced that the extra downloads were necessary (early adopters already had the patch, new adopters can also get Luna) ... but current approach won't hurt.
+
** Do we want to stick to the "Service" model or allow feature updates ?
 +
** Mars.1 winding down -- sticking to "Critical Fixes Only" for that
 +
** Too much in the maintenance stream causes risk of defocus ... are there relevant features that are worth the extra effort ?
 +
** Dani: Suggests to require PMC Approval for adding a feature in - example candidate: Improvements for HiDPI
 +
*** Also: What about version number (2nd digit version update), IP disclosures, Translations ... ?
 +
*** Dani would suggest sticking to 3rd digit update only in the marketing release number; but a Release Review would be needed
  
−
* John - '''Hard to review all incoming Platform/UI Contributions'''
+
'''August 26, 2015''' -
−
** Dani tried to jump in on some issues like Icons
+
* Dani/Alex/Martin can't join (traveling)
−
** Doubt that some of the work will really help bringing committers on board (such as the for loop conversion)
+
−
** Some of the initial contributors of very simple things have now grown into contributing real interesting things
+
−
** Getting more people involved in initial reviews (currently some 10 active committers, 4-5 fullday ones) - but mainly Eric and Paul review patches
+
  
 
<hr/>
 
<hr/>
 +
'''August 19, 2015''' - Alex, Dani
 +
* nothing to discuss
  
−
'''April 2, 2014''' - Dani, Alex, John, Martin
+
<hr/>
−
* Dani - new GTK3+ issues
+
'''August 12, 2015''' - John, Dani
−
** crash/hang when SWT AWT bridge is used, also affects JavaFX ({{bug|431330}})
+
* John asked whether we run on Windows 10
−
** problems with main menu ({{bug|419830}})
+
** Dani: yes, the team already tested on it a few weeks ago. Runs smoothly one bug so far. Browser widget works despite new browser (Edge)
−
* Dani - '''Submitting the IP Log for the Java 8 Work'''
+
** ''Martin (added after the meeting): A CDT update is needed to keep the Terminal from hanging (see {{bug|474327}}, will release with Mars.1). Got some duplicates already. Workaround is switch the Win10 Console to "Legacy Mode".''
−
** Currently not qualified as a "release", only submitting the IP log.
+
* Dani would like to get plan feedback by Friday EOD
−
* Dani - need to '''approve API changes for Java 8 in M7'''
+
 
−
** No API changes, only additions
+
<hr/>
−
** Used / tested by JDT Core / JDT UI
+
'''August 5, 2015''' - McQ, John, Dani, Alex, Martin
−
** ObjectTeams (Stephan Herrmann) was involved
+
* PC meeting later today (planning calendar, calling SR1/2 "Update 1/2" instead
−
** There were no objections i.e. changes were approved
+
** adding another release before Christmas might be a next step - even if Platform contributes identical bits
−
* John - '''SWT over JavaFX'''
+
 
−
** EclipseCon: Steve Northover thought it was possible, just a lot of work
+
* Dani: '''[[Eclipse/Mars Retrospective]]'''
−
** Decide after Luna whether hosting in SWT or doing as a separate project
+
** Move more components to Tycho build? (Would still need Ant to test against final build/bits)
−
** Relationship to Tom Schindl's [http://www.eclipse.org/efxclipse/index.html e(fx)clipse project] ?
+
** Contribution Review Dates: joined by some components but not all
−
*** e(fx)clipse is more about tooling, not so much about rendering ...
+
** Error Reporter: Interesting to look at top ten but the sheer number is too big
−
*** Tom seems to have an alpha version, but not actively working on it
+
*** John - based on Orion experience with similar error reporting :
−
*** Seem to need some additional API in SWT - patch sits in Gerrit with nobody putting any attention at the moment. Details in {{bug|426243}}
+
**** Looking at changes in reported issues is more interesting than looking at reports themselves
−
*** Having this API in place would make the JavaFX port simpler
+
**** Reports help getting contributions (But, Dani finds that "just adding a null check" is often not what's desired for Java .. though helpful for Javascript)
−
**** It look good but Alex has no idea whether it's the best idea and how acceptable on all platforms
+
 
−
**** John: May make sense in the next release, API can't be a near-term thing ... needs some backers who can invest significant time in it
+
* Dani: Foundation IP team doesn't require updating copyright notices per contribution any more (since that information is in git anyways)
−
*** Doug Schaefer is also pushing for JavaFX
+
** The Project has to agree
 +
** Some contributors like to have their name in the source -- that's OK, no requirement to remove author information, but no requirement to add either
 +
** Won't remove existing lists (they never claimed to be complete, since there always was the "...and others" copyright notice
 +
** Dani to sent [https://dev.eclipse.org/mhonarc/lists/eclipse-pmc/msg02422.html request for voting]
 +
 
 +
* Dani: Switching to '''Jetty 9.3.x (which requires JRE 8)'''
 +
** JRE 8 from Oracle (and also from IBM) exists for all Reference Platforms
 +
** Except Solaris, because we only support Solaris 32-bit and the JRE only exists as 64-bit
 +
** But the Plan for Neon is to have 64-bit Solaris support
 +
** New Language features in Java 8 are adopted, contributors would like to start using Java 8
 +
** McQ: In the past, staying on older Java was desired to enable more widespread use ... today, this argument does not seem valid any more, in fact likely more contributions / community is enabled by moving to Java 8
 +
** Dani: Only concern is some "non reference" Platforms like HP-UX might not have JREs initially; but that's OK as long as the reference platforms are good
 +
** '''AGREEMENT''' to move to JRE 8 and allow projects to use Java 8 in their code.
 +
 
 +
* Dani: Looking for a contributor for SWT improvements for GTK3
 +
 
 +
* Martin: '''libwebkitgtk-3 on Ubuntu 14 forcing GTK 2''' not working ?
 +
** Alex: Using libwebkitgtk-4 which is much more stable, but not implementing the full SWT API
 +
** Most distros don't ship libwebkit for gtk-2 any more since it's not supported upstream any more and has many security issues
 +
 
 +
* Alex: '''Build SWT at the Foundation'''
 +
** Work with the Foundation going well, expect to have RHEL machines deployed at the foundation next month
  
  
 
<hr/>
 
<hr/>
−
'''March 26, 2014''' - John, Dani, Martin, Alex
+
'''July 15, 22 and 29, 2015''' -- no meeting
−
* John - '''EclipseCon Update'''
+
−
** Slightly smaller than in the past, but VERY of positive attitude, LOT of excitement around Java 8 ... Oracle turned on the servers during one of the morning sessions
+
−
** IoT / M2M - lots of demos on Raspberry Pi, many new projects
+
−
** Very good content around Orion and Javascript, but a small crowd
+
−
** Great opening keynote from Mike Milinkovich on the history and future of Eclipse - mentioned Flux
+
−
** See also Blog Posts from [http://cdtdoug.ca/ Doug Schaefer] and [http://eclipsesource.com/blogs/author/irbull/ Ian Bull] as well as [https://www.eclipsecon.org/na2014/news/top-5-ian-bull top 5 from Ian]
+
−
* John - '''ARM port of GTK''' - any tracking items ?
+
−
** Bug exists for Launchers on ARM64 ; several other items too
+
−
** IBM PPC Little Endian port of SWT
+
−
** Test on less used architectures like Solaris? - similar to the Windows 8 case...
+
−
** Donating RHEL subscriptions to the Foundation was not accepted - John: Bug is open for having Hudson slaves run on other architectures
+
−
*** Example: {{bug|430698}}, {{bug|429237}}, {{bug|415757}}; {{bug|419855}} talks about running virtualbox images on a vserver
+
−
*** Denis is investigating some way running Hudson / HIPP instances on other hardware ... GTK3, Windows etc tests need other hardware
+
−
*** Check for cost of hardware, companies to donate it, and people to maintain it (Security patches!)
+
−
**** Alex could imagine RH signing up for some maintenance ... test machines could be entirely outside Eclipse.org infrastructure, isolated as their own sandbox
+
−
**** Hudson needs access though, thus need to be careful about security
+
−
* Alex - '''Java 8 vs Java 7''' currently can't build an Eclipse SDK when the build machine has only one of the JDK's
+
−
** In the past, it was possible to build with only Java 7 ... now, if I have Java 8 I cannot build (need Java 7 too)
+
−
** ==> Update on March 27 by Dani: this is {{bug|390889}} and we'll try to fix it for M7.
+
  
 
<hr/>
 
<hr/>
−
'''March 19, 2014''' - Dani, Alex, Martin, McQ
+
'''July 8, 2015''' - McQ, Dani, John, Martin, Alex
−
* McQ - '''Congrats on Java 8 Release''' to coincide with the Oracle release
+
* John: '''Cross-Language Tooling Discussion''' on the eclipse.org-architecture-council and ide-dev mailing lists
−
* Dani - '''Windows 8 Support''' - any answer to John's E-Mail ?
+
* decided to cancel the upcoming July meetings
−
** McQ struggles with calling it a supported platform when nobody tests it; all we need to make sure is that somebody uses it
+
−
** Send note to Wayne, the epp-dev list and cross-project
+
−
** Make it clear that running on Win8 is a useful contribution ... and we WON't put Win8 on supported platforms list if we don't get that confirmation
+
  
 
<hr/>
 
<hr/>
−
'''March 12, 2014''' - Alex, Martin, McQ, John
+
'''July 1, 2015''' -- no meeting
−
* GTK - SWT team discussions
+
−
* John - '''preparing for Java 8 release'''
+
  
 
<hr/>
 
<hr/>
−
'''March 5, 2014''' - John, Dani, Martin, Alex
+
'''June 24, 2015''' - McQ, Dani, Martin, Alex
−
* Dani: '''How to Avoid Spam in Gerrit''' - Bug in Bugzilla PMC bucket - consider offline
+
* Dani: '''Java 9''' - <a href="http://marketplace.eclipse.org/content/eclipse-java%E2%84%A2-9-support-beta-mars">EAR Feature Patch</a> on the Marketplace NOW
−
* Dani: '''Windows 8 Support'''
+
** No JARs any more - JRE is doing things internally using "jimage" format; updated search etc to create projects and work against them
−
** Not listed in official plan
+
** If the Jimage filesystem provider isn't backported, one has to run the IDE on Java9 in order to code Java9
−
** No technical problem, but lack of resources - only 1 machine on the IBM team and that's a VM
+
** Modules are just a list of packages (and can refer to other modules) - no real JSR describing the plan yet - seems like just a replacement of "Profiles" (and JARs)
−
** Add as supported Platform for Luna, or wait another year ?
+
−
** Most active development is on Linux and Windows 7 these days... agree with Dani that only active developer use helps finding real issues
+
−
** AI John: Send a note to eclipse-dev
+
−
*** Reaching out to Community to find an active user would be sufficient ... WPF or Win32 ? WPF is only a runtime target environment as of today.
+
−
* Dani: '''State of GTK 3+'''
+
−
** Not yet fixed on Eclipse side, but GTK found a bug on their side that is going to be fixed; not yet sure though if that will fix everything
+
−
** Launcher now has a fallback to GTK2 if it detects the partially supported GTK3 version
+
−
** Good collaboration after an initial warm-up phase ... Eclipse SWT considered an important-enough client to make fixes for
+
−
** Alex: Concerned about users with a GTK 3.8 distro that update to GTK 3.10 and get the fallback to GTK 2 activated which has crashes with autocomplete in the browser
+
−
** On GTK 3.9 or newer, Launcher falls back to GTK 2 but that port is pretty much unmaintained, several other problems in there ... but not falling back is even worse
+
−
** Should be fine once distros start picking up paint / clipping issue fix (the not-drawing fix is still pending on SWT side)
+
−
* Alex: '''GTK 3 in Mars'''
+
−
** Bump minimum required version to only use cairo and get rid of older calls - this causes confusion with GTK folk
+
−
** RHEL 5 would no longer work
+
−
** Thanks to SWT now requiring Java 1.5, can simplify the code wrt JNI
+
  
 
<hr/>
 
<hr/>
−
'''February 26, 2014''' - Alex, John, Martin, McQ
+
'''June 17, 2015''' - Dani, John, Martin, Alex
−
* John: '''Orion Release''' this week
+
* John: '''Mars''' Platform in good shape for Mars - EPP respin for Error Reporting
 +
* Dani: '''Crashes with Java 8''' - Potentially will add to the online README
 +
** Happens in the JIT, with latest Oracle Java 8 (with 8 Cores and very specific circumstances)
 +
** See {{Bug|465693}} - Probably https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8078262
 +
* Alex: '''XDG Application''' - looks like Docker but a similar idea
 +
** Environment description of the runtime - helps specifying the line-up of library versions that we test against and use
 +
** Big part of GNOME / GTK already pushing for it, might make sense to consider alignment
 +
** GNOME working towards compiling with a really old compiler, such that the physically identical bits can run against a large set of distros
 +
** See https://wiki.gnome.org/Projects/SandboxedApps
 +
** But if you want to try it out please read https://blogs.gnome.org/alexl/2015/06/17/testing-rawhide-apps-using-xdg-app/
  
−
* Alex: '''Eclipse on ARM64'''
+
<hr/>
−
** Launcher and swt at first
+
−
** Had ports for other architectures in source form in the past, risk to get stale but helps getting the ball rolling
+
−
** John: Quite a lot steps to make a new Platform real - constants in OSGi, ... - but can happen piecemeal eg only do SWT first
+
−
*** Martin: Would make sense to document the required steps for adding a new Platform while doing the job
+
−
*** At least, write up the TODO list - in order to make it easier the next time
+
−
** Should ask Tom Watson about OSGi constants
+
  
−
* Dani: Update on '''GTK 3+ issue''' - bug filed against GTK, working on a workaround for fallback but not yet finished
+
'''June 10, 2015''' - Dani, Alex, Martin
−
** Alex: Fix in GTK3 alone wouldn't work because SWT overrides GTK in that part
+
* Dani: 4.5RC4 looking good, no more fixes planned
−
** McQ: If SWT API can't be implemented on top of new GTK API any more, discussion needs to happen
+
* Dani: Working on Java 9 feature patch
−
*** If SWT does something wrong, would need pointers to what they should be doing instead...
+
* Alex: PC discussing a change in the release train
−
*** Maybe a couple phone calls to talk through the technical details
+
** Current common ground seems to be a request for more release points, and projects could decide whether they do features or maintenance
−
*** Don't fight over things ... figure out what's the right thing to do, and just do it
+
** From Platform point of view, stability is key. Some key contributors not interested doing
 +
** Martin: How to also cater to contributors who want their contributions released soon ?
 +
*** Martin Idea: With Tycho, building the Platform is easier so ask contributors build themselves
 +
*** Or, open up a new "experimental" stream ?
 +
*** Dani Idea: Market milestone builds differently, as "fully consumable" would serve the same purpose
 +
* Martin: Tested eclipse-installer (Oomph), looking really really good now
  
 +
<hr/>
 +
'''June 3, 2015''' - Alex, Dani, Martin, McQ, John
 +
* Dani: '''Mars Endgame'''
 +
* Dani: Please vote for release review
  
 
<hr/>
 
<hr/>
−
'''February 19, 2014''' - Dani, Alex, Martin, John
+
'''May 20, 2015''' - Dani, Alex, Martin, McQ
−
* Dani: '''Silenio to work on GTK issue?'''
+
* Dani: '''Security Update''' - Platform work done, Orbit updated, reached out to Wayne and other affected projects.
−
* John: '''GTK testing at the Eclipse Foundation'''
+
* Dani: '''RC2 Build''' - too many bugs assigned, Lars on Vacation, Dani will fill in
−
* John: '''e4 ML discussion about graduating some tools'''
+
* McQ: '''Too Many Platforms Built?''' - Who's really hurt by "too many builds" ?
−
** Model Editor, CSS Editor, CSS Spy, ...
+
** Will meet with Mike & Foundation tomorrow, Alex is also interested (Dani to check).
−
** Fairly late, but risk is rather low -- suggest putting into PDE
+
−
** Dani concerns: No PDE committers available for handholding - and stuff is not polished; even Lars sees it in Luna+1
+
−
** John: These tools would only be used by people building RCP apps
+
−
** Martin: What is the goal of trying to graduate?
+
−
*** If it's just about getting more exposure, perhaps keep in incubation and add to the RCP EPP Package ?
+
−
** Alex would like adding new people / interested contributors to PDE
+
  
 
<hr/>
 
<hr/>
−
'''February 5, 2014''' - McQ, Dani, Martin, Alex
+
'''May 13, 2015''' - McQ, John, Alex, Martin
−
* Dani: '''Confcall Numbers:''' Skype into the US tollfree; Alex use SIP
+
* John, Dani - Mars Endgame looking good
−
* Martin: Eclipse 4 vs Eclipse 3.x - will file defects
+
* Alex - {{bug|465874}} Lucene 5 looking good, almost done - Ready to commit as soon as CQs are in and Mars+1 is open
−
* Alex: Testing on modern Linux
+
* JDT for Java 9 - will need a wider discussion with EMO on make it easier to publish the work, e.g. in normal builds
  
 
<hr/>
 
<hr/>
−
'''January 22, 2014''' - John, Dani, Alex, Martin
+
'''May 6, 2015''' - McQ, Dani, Martin, John
−
* John, Alex: '''New GTK 3.10 breaking Eclipse on latest Fedora'''
+
* Dani: '''Java 9 timing''' - slight delay
−
** Alex been looking at Browser
+
* Dani: RC1 preps
−
** Some Views not showing up - Silenio just back yesterday
+
** 2-day test pass went fine - 2 severe issues found, will be addressed
−
** Dani: For 4.4m5 and 4.3.2, will document issues in the README
+
** Request to watch PMC mailing list for API exceptions and defect approvals
−
*** Considered a fallback to "gtk2" support in the Launcher, but that was considered too risky
+
* John: '''PC Discussion on Release Cycles'''
−
*** Silenio might have a workaround ... OK if the new code can be added conditionally for GTK 3.10 only
+
** Multiple releases per year PLUS maintenance streams seems like overkill
−
* Dani: '''M5 Status'''
+
** Consider an approach like Orion that just moves constantly forward
−
** Still many open bugs not triaged - component leads should triage earlier
+
** Especially for the Platform, being rock solid is most important. Still to attract new contributors we need to allow more frequent "feature updates".
 +
*** A model where both "stable/maintenance" _and_ "features" are contributed to the train might be too much work/overhead.
 +
*** Consider a model like Ubuntu, ... with some release numbers being "stable/LTS base" and others being "in-between feature releases" ?
 +
*** Consider a model like LTS for maintenance fixes / aside mainstream just moving forward ?
  
 +
 +
'''April 15, 2015''' - Dani, John, McQ, Alex, Martin
 +
* Dani: '''Java 1.7 Changes'''
 +
** Some bundles have been moved to a 1.7 BREE by new committers, even after API freeze
 +
** Rule has always been "we move up when there's a reason to move up". We won't move up without reason.
 +
*** Dani: Moving the BREE may even cause API changes, so should only be done when incrementing the minor version (5% risk)
 +
*** Alex: Such updates allow staying current and not get to "rewrite is needed" state (thus needed) but has to happen before M6 (API freeze)
 +
** Alex suggest not accepting additional changes, but not reverting either (to avoid churn)
 +
* Dani: '''Batik 1.6 update'''
 +
 +
<hr/>
 +
'''April 8, 2015''' - Dani, Martin, Alex, John, McQ
 +
* Dani: '''Batik''' - Platform is good, Train may need to update, perhaps updating one bundle only would suffice. John will follow up.
 +
* Alex: '''SWT for GTK 3 News'''
 +
** GTK port finally decoupled from X11 - it renders on Wayland now, can switch the renderer to a pure HTML one
 +
** This opens up opportunities (but depends on hosts that have GTK).
 +
 +
 +
<hr/>
 +
'''April 1, 2015''' - McQ, Alex, Martin, Dani (Regrets: John travelling)
 +
* Alex: '''GTK 3.16''' seeing issues again - fixed some crashes, but scrolling is still entirely broken
 +
** SWT uses a number of things that GTK declares as "implementation detail"
 +
* PMC approval on piggyback CQ's (AC question forwarded by John)
 +
** Dani sent [https://dev.eclipse.org/mhonarc/lists/eclipse-pmc/msg02332.html our position] to John in order to update the AC
 +
 +
<hr/>
 +
'''March 18, 2015''' - Dani, Alex, Martin, McQ, John
 +
* John: '''EclipseCon''' - Bigger this year due to LocationTech (750 attendees)
 +
** Mark Reinhold keynote and "after-session" on Java 9
 +
** Much interest in Orion JS tooling / editor, also on desktop
 +
** Public face of Eclipse Platform at the conference was much more diverse than in the past (Lars Vogel, Max Anderson, Google ...)
 +
* Dani: {{bug|458730}} '''Mars Plan Update'''
 +
* Dani: '''e4 project leadership''' approved by EMO
 +
* Dani: Szymon Brandys resigned as Platform/Resources co-lead. Need to +1 on the mailing list
 +
 +
<hr/>
 +
 +
'''March 11, 2015 - no meeting (EclipseCon)'''
 +
 +
<hr/>
 +
 +
'''March 4, 2015''' - Dani, McQ, Martin, John
 +
* Dani: '''e4 leadership''' - Dani will volunteer to co-lead
 +
* Dani: '''BREEs''' - documentation about how to pick the EE
 +
** Recommending the "earliest generally supported JRE that provides the capabilities you need"
 +
** Would like an URL on the page pointing to the most recent plan (talking to Wayne)
 +
* John: '''greatfix contest'''
 +
** Dani: Working well - some very small contributions but some also very large (eg Customize Perspective fixes)
 +
* John: '''EclipseCon''' - numbers looking good; join Planning Council Breakfast as delegate for Dani
 +
 +
<hr/>
 +
'''February 25, 2015''' - Dani, Martin McQ
 +
* No topics
 +
 +
<hr/>
 +
'''February 18, 2015''' - Dani, Alex, Martin
 +
* Alex: '''Building Native Launchers'''
 +
** Current way of building is kinda unpredictable - even if getting some agreement on versions to use, results are kinda unpredictable
 +
** Pushing towards Hudson RHEL builders at least at the EF to get more transparency and automation - attempt to mimic the infrastructure at IBM
 +
** Looking at 3 primary architectures (at the EF) for Linux vs. secondary architectures (non-public builders potentially)
 +
* Dani: Great initiative, but other (non-EF) builders must not be broken
 +
** EF doesn't allow any commercial tools (but currently, e.g. Windows launchers are built with MSVS)
 +
* Alex is willing to spend time to get Linux builds running; but can't help with other architectures
 +
** Martin: great approach - for Windows, using a cross-compiler on Linux might be interesting (after Linux native works)
 +
* Alex: This is just phase one - getting rid of the binaries in git repos might be phase 2 (since the checked-in binaries easily cause inconsistencies between Java and Native side)
 +
** Martin: Checked-in binaries help consumers and contributors who just want to make a Java change
 +
** Dani: Checked-in binaries are also used for comparing build results for expected vs accidental changes
 +
 +
* Alex: '''{{bug|459399}} - Policy for recommended minimum execution environments for bundles'''
 +
** Dani: It works today
 +
*** To run Eclipse, Java 8 or Java 9 can be used (minimum BREE has no impact)
 +
*** To modify the source, a new JRE can be used but then the Execution Environment Descriptions need to be installed
 +
** Policy as discussed in the past: Each project can increase the BREE if there is a real need (such as generifying) and no upstream clients are broken
 +
*** But don't change the BREE without justification -- changing the BREE always has some effect, such as new warnings that would need to be addressed
 +
*** Suggested BREE for new bundles has already been changed by Lars
 +
* Alex: Even for bundles in "maintenance mode", old BREE causes issues for people who build from source (who have to change compilers etc)
 +
* No conclusion so far (Alex and Dani disagree)
 +
 +
* Dani: '''e4 leadership'''
 +
** Mature bits being moved to Eclipse - e4 remaining as an incubator to keep alive for experiments with low entry barrier
 +
 +
<hr/>
 +
'''February 11, 2015''' - Dani, Alex
 +
* no topics
 +
 +
<hr/>
 +
 +
'''February 4, 2015''' - Dani, Alex, Martin
 +
* Alex: With GTK-3.15.[345] , Eclipse is entirely unusable
 +
** Alex has some dirty workarounds to make it start, but still many issues like trees not painted, ...
 +
** Crash on startup identified to be GTK bug. Fix to be released in 3.15.6 https://git.gnome.org/browse/gtk+/commit/?id=edec64cda3d4518b4e87d5ea5d287d4570ba9933
 +
* Dani: Working on Solaris 64-bit
 +
 +
<hr/>
 +
 +
'''January 28, 2015''' - Dani, Alex, John
 +
* Dani: Switch Mac OS X 10.9 with 10.10 in Mars target environments
 +
** No objections
 +
* Alex: Looking for any Eclipse related activity @Fosdem
 +
<hr/>
 +
 +
'''January 21, 2015''' - Dani, Alex, Martin, McQ
 +
* Alex: '''Process for allowing non-committers extended bugzilla privileges (for bug triage)?'''
 +
** Dani: Yes a process exists. Send bugzilla username to Dani.
 +
* Alex: '''New resource for helping with SWT'''
 +
* Dani: '''Platform/UI co-lead'''
 +
* Dani: Solaris: Java 8 will only support 64 bits on both Intel and SPARC --&gt; IBM SWT Team considering to invest in getting patches in for 64-bit Solaris
 +
 +
<hr/>
 +
'''January 14, 2015''' - Dani, Alex, Martin, McQ, John
 +
* Dani: Update on Platform/UI Leadership: Daniel Rolka left IBM and for now has no time to contribute. He stepped down as co-lead and nominated Lars Vogel
 +
* Dani: Solaris x86 64-bit support - patches exist, but no machine available. No luck to get one from Oracle or via Eclipse Foundation. We will not support Solaris x86 64-bit unless someone makes a machine available
 
<hr/>
 
<hr/>
−
'''January 15, 2014''' - McQ, Andrew, Dani, Martin
 
−
* Dani: Lakshmi (SWT Team) going on maternity leave - SWT still a decent team of 4
 
−
* Andrew: PMC Participation - Suggestion
 
  
 +
'''January 7, 2015''' - Dani, Alex, Martin, McQ, John
 +
* Dani: '''Platform/UI Leadership'''
 +
* John: '''Git security issue''' - pick up a patch for Jgit in the packages before SR2? - Mostly an EPP
 
<hr/>
 
<hr/>
−
'''January 8, 2014''' - Dani, Martin, Andrew, John, McQ
 
−
* Dani: '''API Freeze''' with M6 on March 7, but JDT cannot put Java 8 stuff in before (March 18) thus will have to ask for an exception
 
  
 
= Archive =
 
= Archive =
 +
* [[Eclipse/PMC/Minutes 2014 | Archive of Meeting Minutes from 2014]]
 
* [[Eclipse/PMC/Minutes 2013 | Archive of Meeting Minutes from 2013]]
 
* [[Eclipse/PMC/Minutes 2013 | Archive of Meeting Minutes from 2013]]
 
* [[Eclipse/PMC/Minutes 2012 | Archive of Meeting Minutes from 2012]]
 
* [[Eclipse/PMC/Minutes 2012 | Archive of Meeting Minutes from 2012]]

Revision as of 04:52, 1 October 2015

Documents

Some documents written and/or used by the PMC:

Meeting Schedule

The Eclipse Project PMC has a weekly phone meeting every Wednesday at 10.30am EST.

Meeting Minutes

September 30, 2015 - McQ, John, Alex, Dani

  • Dani: will send a note to PMC list asking to approve new Debug leadership (Sarika)
  • Dani: we should finalize our API removal discussion from last week
    • agreed that APIs marked for removal have to be annotated with @noreference
    • agreed that components should be allowed to remove API but they have to provide good reasons
    • agreed that we won't allow to delete APIs simply because they are deprecated
    • agreed that the PMC will decide case by case i.e. there will be no general rule
    • regarding version numbering we decided to also decide this case by case
    • Dani to update the removal document and have it reviewed by the PMC

September 23, 2015 - Dani, John, Alex, Martin

  • Dani: JDT Core - Co-lead going to step up
  • Dani: API Removal Discussion
    • Q1: When do we actually delete API? What's the benefit compared to the pain that we cause ?
      • Example of methods that don't do anything any more or do wrong things -- those should be removed
      • Example TableTreeViewer : Continue having the API doesn't hurt, there's no significant benefit removing it
        • Alex: TableTree was completely broken on GTK for 2-3 years ... keeping such components that don't work properly lowers the quality
        • Dani: Is there actual proof of bugs ? Or could it be working fine on Windows RCP ? If it's deprecated, people use it at own risk; do we really need to break them, if it provides value to some people on some Platforms ?
        • John: In TableTreeViewer case, EMF had some generic code (was unclear if the path was ever taken) and CDT could update easily
      • Summary: scheduling for removal is OK with good arguments. Give Adopters a chance to respond before removal takes place.
    • Q2: How to deal with the versions?
      • Dani: Updating the major causes major pain on everyone (adoption work), so this should be avoided
        • Actively developed plugins will notice source breakage when recompiling anyways -- no need to update the major for them.
        • For dormant plugins (not recompiled), everyone will break when updating the major although only few may be affected - is it worth notifying those small percentage that might break ?
        • Plugins who don't care recompiling may have to live with ClassNotFoundException
        • Tooling exists: API Use Scan Tools can discover incorrect API references that are not announced by the versions
      • Summary: Handle the Major with care -- in most cases, the cost of updating the major is not justified by the benefit.
    • John: Announcement When thinking about removing something, we should announce that far and wide and ask for feedback
      • Martin: But which channel is as effective as actually removing it ? There's always who don't actually listen...
      • John: Still, giving a possibility to listen is important. Agree that mentioning in the release docs is not enough.
      • Dani: When making a release, also send message with a link to the removals page (for all removals that are planned)
    • John: Mechanisms for maintaining binary compatibility while only breaking source compatibility (but it's a lot of work!)
      • Dani: Agree, in this case better just leave it in there
    • Alex: What to do next time, can we remove more stuff ?
      • Martin: Should be at the discretion of the committers. They do the work. If they see the need for removal, they should be allowed to do so (as long as they play by the rules, like early announcement). Need to define what the rules are.
    • John: There was an interesting discussion on cross-project, asking for well-known points in time where major breakage can occur
      • Eg release but without all the deprecated at certain well-known point in time eg every 3-5 years
      • AI continue that discussion on the Architecture Council
    • Summary: Essentially do what we did, plus more communication upfront, allow people to respond before deletion happens (to avoid churn)
      • Committers still need to be able to delete stuff when they find it necessary.
      • Updating the major (or not) to be decided case by case, but in many cases "breaking everyone" is not justified against "notifying few dormant plugins".
  • Alex: Bumping the minimum GTK version again (may cause issues on Platforms like AIX -- to be discussed when it's time)


September 16, 2015 - John, Martin

  • John: API Removal Discussion
    • No urgency now -- changes have been reverted for now, and scheduled for 2017
    • Updating the major of a bundle knowingly breaks everyone/most adopters
      • In the past, breaking changes have often been small enough to work without increasing the major
      • One can argue that removing TableTreeViewer is big enough to warrant updating the major
    • Versioning packages has not been done in the past due to the huge upcoming maintenance effort when starting to do so
    • "Release Version" is decoupled from "bundle versions" already (and may move to date-based versions eg "2016.1" with rolling updates moving forward
    • --> will have more discussion next week

September 9, 2015 - Dani, Alex, Martin, John, McQ

  • John: Planning Council Updates
    • 4 planned releases (March, June, September, December -- essentially end of each quarter) with flexible contents
    • Mid December rather than end to avoid churn, so this one is a little shorter
    • Only June is "major" - allowing to drop off, or breaking changes; others are "minor"
    • McQ want to reduce the number of simultaneous streams -- if "master" is more stable more often that's OK, but avoid too many "live" streams
  • Software is getting more important - would be good to better support multicore
  • John: IntelliJ change in licensing / sales model
    • Many eclipse-positive comments on the announcement blog
    • Possibility putting Money on Eclipse Development may become interesting for companies in this context

September 2, 2015 - Dani, Alex, Martin, John

  • Dani: EclipseDay India on Saturday, 200 attendees wanted to join, hat to cut to 150
    • Keynote by Mike Milinkovich - large Community
  • Dani: Policy for and Mars.2
    • Do we want to stick to the "Service" model or allow feature updates ?
    • Mars.1 winding down -- sticking to "Critical Fixes Only" for that
    • Too much in the maintenance stream causes risk of defocus ... are there relevant features that are worth the extra effort ?
    • Dani: Suggests to require PMC Approval for adding a feature in - example candidate: Improvements for HiDPI
      • Also: What about version number (2nd digit version update), IP disclosures, Translations ... ?
      • Dani would suggest sticking to 3rd digit update only in the marketing release number; but a Release Review would be needed

August 26, 2015 -

  • Dani/Alex/Martin can't join (traveling)

August 19, 2015 - Alex, Dani

  • nothing to discuss

August 12, 2015 - John, Dani

  • John asked whether we run on Windows 10
    • Dani: yes, the team already tested on it a few weeks ago. Runs smoothly one bug so far. Browser widget works despite new browser (Edge)
    • Martin (added after the meeting): A CDT update is needed to keep the Terminal from hanging (see bug 474327, will release with Mars.1). Got some duplicates already. Workaround is switch the Win10 Console to "Legacy Mode".
  • Dani would like to get plan feedback by Friday EOD

August 5, 2015 - McQ, John, Dani, Alex, Martin

  • PC meeting later today (planning calendar, calling SR1/2 "Update 1/2" instead
    • adding another release before Christmas might be a next step - even if Platform contributes identical bits
  • Dani: Eclipse/Mars Retrospective
    • Move more components to Tycho build? (Would still need Ant to test against final build/bits)
    • Contribution Review Dates: joined by some components but not all
    • Error Reporter: Interesting to look at top ten but the sheer number is too big
      • John - based on Orion experience with similar error reporting :
        • Looking at changes in reported issues is more interesting than looking at reports themselves
        • Reports help getting contributions (But, Dani finds that "just adding a null check" is often not what's desired for Java .. though helpful for Javascript)
  • Dani: Foundation IP team doesn't require updating copyright notices per contribution any more (since that information is in git anyways)
    • The Project has to agree
    • Some contributors like to have their name in the source -- that's OK, no requirement to remove author information, but no requirement to add either
    • Won't remove existing lists (they never claimed to be complete, since there always was the "...and others" copyright notice
    • Dani to sent request for voting
  • Dani: Switching to Jetty 9.3.x (which requires JRE 8)
    • JRE 8 from Oracle (and also from IBM) exists for all Reference Platforms
    • Except Solaris, because we only support Solaris 32-bit and the JRE only exists as 64-bit
    • But the Plan for Neon is to have 64-bit Solaris support
    • New Language features in Java 8 are adopted, contributors would like to start using Java 8
    • McQ: In the past, staying on older Java was desired to enable more widespread use ... today, this argument does not seem valid any more, in fact likely more contributions / community is enabled by moving to Java 8
    • Dani: Only concern is some "non reference" Platforms like HP-UX might not have JREs initially; but that's OK as long as the reference platforms are good
    • AGREEMENT to move to JRE 8 and allow projects to use Java 8 in their code.
  • Dani: Looking for a contributor for SWT improvements for GTK3
  • Martin: libwebkitgtk-3 on Ubuntu 14 forcing GTK 2 not working ?
    • Alex: Using libwebkitgtk-4 which is much more stable, but not implementing the full SWT API
    • Most distros don't ship libwebkit for gtk-2 any more since it's not supported upstream any more and has many security issues
  • Alex: Build SWT at the Foundation
    • Work with the Foundation going well, expect to have RHEL machines deployed at the foundation next month


July 15, 22 and 29, 2015 -- no meeting

July 8, 2015 - McQ, Dani, John, Martin, Alex

  • John: Cross-Language Tooling Discussion on the eclipse.org-architecture-council and ide-dev mailing lists
  • decided to cancel the upcoming July meetings

July 1, 2015 -- no meeting

June 24, 2015 - McQ, Dani, Martin, Alex

  • Dani: Java 9 - <a href="http://marketplace.eclipse.org/content/eclipse-java%E2%84%A2-9-support-beta-mars">EAR Feature Patch</a> on the Marketplace NOW
    • No JARs any more - JRE is doing things internally using "jimage" format; updated search etc to create projects and work against them
    • If the Jimage filesystem provider isn't backported, one has to run the IDE on Java9 in order to code Java9
    • Modules are just a list of packages (and can refer to other modules) - no real JSR describing the plan yet - seems like just a replacement of "Profiles" (and JARs)

June 17, 2015 - Dani, John, Martin, Alex

June 10, 2015 - Dani, Alex, Martin

  • Dani: 4.5RC4 looking good, no more fixes planned
  • Dani: Working on Java 9 feature patch
  • Alex: PC discussing a change in the release train
    • Current common ground seems to be a request for more release points, and projects could decide whether they do features or maintenance
    • From Platform point of view, stability is key. Some key contributors not interested doing
    • Martin: How to also cater to contributors who want their contributions released soon ?
      • Martin Idea: With Tycho, building the Platform is easier so ask contributors build themselves
      • Or, open up a new "experimental" stream ?
      • Dani Idea: Market milestone builds differently, as "fully consumable" would serve the same purpose
  • Martin: Tested eclipse-installer (Oomph), looking really really good now

June 3, 2015 - Alex, Dani, Martin, McQ, John

  • Dani: Mars Endgame
  • Dani: Please vote for release review

May 20, 2015 - Dani, Alex, Martin, McQ

  • Dani: Security Update - Platform work done, Orbit updated, reached out to Wayne and other affected projects.
  • Dani: RC2 Build - too many bugs assigned, Lars on Vacation, Dani will fill in
  • McQ: Too Many Platforms Built? - Who's really hurt by "too many builds" ?
    • Will meet with Mike & Foundation tomorrow, Alex is also interested (Dani to check).

May 13, 2015 - McQ, John, Alex, Martin

  • John, Dani - Mars Endgame looking good
  • Alex - bug 465874 Lucene 5 looking good, almost done - Ready to commit as soon as CQs are in and Mars+1 is open
  • JDT for Java 9 - will need a wider discussion with EMO on make it easier to publish the work, e.g. in normal builds

May 6, 2015 - McQ, Dani, Martin, John

  • Dani: Java 9 timing - slight delay
  • Dani: RC1 preps
    • 2-day test pass went fine - 2 severe issues found, will be addressed
    • Request to watch PMC mailing list for API exceptions and defect approvals
  • John: PC Discussion on Release Cycles
    • Multiple releases per year PLUS maintenance streams seems like overkill
    • Consider an approach like Orion that just moves constantly forward
    • Especially for the Platform, being rock solid is most important. Still to attract new contributors we need to allow more frequent "feature updates".
      • A model where both "stable/maintenance" _and_ "features" are contributed to the train might be too much work/overhead.
      • Consider a model like Ubuntu, ... with some release numbers being "stable/LTS base" and others being "in-between feature releases" ?
      • Consider a model like LTS for maintenance fixes / aside mainstream just moving forward ?


April 15, 2015 - Dani, John, McQ, Alex, Martin

  • Dani: Java 1.7 Changes
    • Some bundles have been moved to a 1.7 BREE by new committers, even after API freeze
    • Rule has always been "we move up when there's a reason to move up". We won't move up without reason.
      • Dani: Moving the BREE may even cause API changes, so should only be done when incrementing the minor version (5% risk)
      • Alex: Such updates allow staying current and not get to "rewrite is needed" state (thus needed) but has to happen before M6 (API freeze)
    • Alex suggest not accepting additional changes, but not reverting either (to avoid churn)
  • Dani: Batik 1.6 update

April 8, 2015 - Dani, Martin, Alex, John, McQ

  • Dani: Batik - Platform is good, Train may need to update, perhaps updating one bundle only would suffice. John will follow up.
  • Alex: SWT for GTK 3 News
    • GTK port finally decoupled from X11 - it renders on Wayland now, can switch the renderer to a pure HTML one
    • This opens up opportunities (but depends on hosts that have GTK).


April 1, 2015 - McQ, Alex, Martin, Dani (Regrets: John travelling)

  • Alex: GTK 3.16 seeing issues again - fixed some crashes, but scrolling is still entirely broken
    • SWT uses a number of things that GTK declares as "implementation detail"
  • PMC approval on piggyback CQ's (AC question forwarded by John)

March 18, 2015 - Dani, Alex, Martin, McQ, John

  • John: EclipseCon - Bigger this year due to LocationTech (750 attendees)
    • Mark Reinhold keynote and "after-session" on Java 9
    • Much interest in Orion JS tooling / editor, also on desktop
    • Public face of Eclipse Platform at the conference was much more diverse than in the past (Lars Vogel, Max Anderson, Google ...)
  • Dani: bug 458730 Mars Plan Update
  • Dani: e4 project leadership approved by EMO
  • Dani: Szymon Brandys resigned as Platform/Resources co-lead. Need to +1 on the mailing list

March 11, 2015 - no meeting (EclipseCon)

March 4, 2015 - Dani, McQ, Martin, John

  • Dani: e4 leadership - Dani will volunteer to co-lead
  • Dani: BREEs - documentation about how to pick the EE
    • Recommending the "earliest generally supported JRE that provides the capabilities you need"
    • Would like an URL on the page pointing to the most recent plan (talking to Wayne)
  • John: greatfix contest
    • Dani: Working well - some very small contributions but some also very large (eg Customize Perspective fixes)
  • John: EclipseCon - numbers looking good; join Planning Council Breakfast as delegate for Dani

February 25, 2015 - Dani, Martin McQ

  • No topics

February 18, 2015 - Dani, Alex, Martin

  • Alex: Building Native Launchers
    • Current way of building is kinda unpredictable - even if getting some agreement on versions to use, results are kinda unpredictable
    • Pushing towards Hudson RHEL builders at least at the EF to get more transparency and automation - attempt to mimic the infrastructure at IBM
    • Looking at 3 primary architectures (at the EF) for Linux vs. secondary architectures (non-public builders potentially)
  • Dani: Great initiative, but other (non-EF) builders must not be broken
    • EF doesn't allow any commercial tools (but currently, e.g. Windows launchers are built with MSVS)
  • Alex is willing to spend time to get Linux builds running; but can't help with other architectures
    • Martin: great approach - for Windows, using a cross-compiler on Linux might be interesting (after Linux native works)
  • Alex: This is just phase one - getting rid of the binaries in git repos might be phase 2 (since the checked-in binaries easily cause inconsistencies between Java and Native side)
    • Martin: Checked-in binaries help consumers and contributors who just want to make a Java change
    • Dani: Checked-in binaries are also used for comparing build results for expected vs accidental changes
  • Alex: bug 459399 - Policy for recommended minimum execution environments for bundles
    • Dani: It works today
      • To run Eclipse, Java 8 or Java 9 can be used (minimum BREE has no impact)
      • To modify the source, a new JRE can be used but then the Execution Environment Descriptions need to be installed
    • Policy as discussed in the past: Each project can increase the BREE if there is a real need (such as generifying) and no upstream clients are broken
      • But don't change the BREE without justification -- changing the BREE always has some effect, such as new warnings that would need to be addressed
      • Suggested BREE for new bundles has already been changed by Lars
  • Alex: Even for bundles in "maintenance mode", old BREE causes issues for people who build from source (who have to change compilers etc)
  • No conclusion so far (Alex and Dani disagree)
  • Dani: e4 leadership
    • Mature bits being moved to Eclipse - e4 remaining as an incubator to keep alive for experiments with low entry barrier

February 11, 2015 - Dani, Alex

  • no topics

February 4, 2015 - Dani, Alex, Martin

January 28, 2015 - Dani, Alex, John

  • Dani: Switch Mac OS X 10.9 with 10.10 in Mars target environments
    • No objections
  • Alex: Looking for any Eclipse related activity @Fosdem

January 21, 2015 - Dani, Alex, Martin, McQ

  • Alex: Process for allowing non-committers extended bugzilla privileges (for bug triage)?
    • Dani: Yes a process exists. Send bugzilla username to Dani.
  • Alex: New resource for helping with SWT
  • Dani: Platform/UI co-lead
  • Dani: Solaris: Java 8 will only support 64 bits on both Intel and SPARC --> IBM SWT Team considering to invest in getting patches in for 64-bit Solaris

January 14, 2015 - Dani, Alex, Martin, McQ, John

  • Dani: Update on Platform/UI Leadership: Daniel Rolka left IBM and for now has no time to contribute. He stepped down as co-lead and nominated Lars Vogel
  • Dani: Solaris x86 64-bit support - patches exist, but no machine available. No luck to get one from Oracle or via Eclipse Foundation. We will not support Solaris x86 64-bit unless someone makes a machine available

January 7, 2015 - Dani, Alex, Martin, McQ, John

  • Dani: Platform/UI Leadership
  • John: Git security issue - pick up a patch for Jgit in the packages before SR2? - Mostly an EPP

Archive

Retrieved from "https://wiki.eclipse.org/index.php?title=Eclipse/PMC&oldid=391903"

Back to the top