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)
m (Meeting Minutes)
(340 intermediate revisions by 8 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 =
'''Dec 15, 2010:''' - McQ, Jeff, Dani, John
 
* Jeff pointed out the idea of using bundle matching attributes ({{bug|328508}}) to effectively declare a bundle symbolic name as internal. This would force consumers to use Import-Package, giving flexibility for future refactoring of packages between bundles
 
* We can't do this for any existing bundle because it would break compatibility
 
* Something to consider for future bundles where package granularity is desired.
 
* It was pointed out that Java's modularity story will likely not be at package granularity, so "module-level" granularity might still be the way to go
 
* 3.7 plan update and 3.6.2 end-game plans coming soon. Send input to John
 
'''Dec 8, 2010:''' - John, McQ, Dani
 
* Meeting canceled for lack of quorum
 
  
'''Dec 1, 2010:''' - John, Jeff, Dani, Martin, McQ
+
'''February 2, 2016''' - Dani, Alex, Martin, McQ
* McQ - '''Jeff Commit Rights on PDE'''
+
* Dani: '''Foundation Hires''' - Dani hopes they'll find someone in Europe to deal with Releng issues
* Dani - '''No EMO approval needed for component leads'''
+
* Dani: '''Neon M5''' went smoothly - M6 will be the API freeze; tomorrow is the last planned RC for Mars.2
** Jeff: EMO doesn't know about components... if it's a project it needs a lead. Better do inform EMO about changes.
+
* Dani: '''CQ Deadline''' on Feb.12 for Neon
** Portal not yet updated to reflect group id changes.
+
* Dani: {{bug|486647}} for changing the strategy when opening files not associated with Eclipse
 +
** With M5, can now use the System Editor (default) or Text Editor - there's a request to always use the text editor
 +
** Dani thinks that for JPG one wants to use the OS
 +
*** Martin agrees, OpenWith and choosing an editor remembers the choice, and one can also remember;
 +
*** We also show the System Icon in Project Explorer, so using the System Editor by default is natural
 +
*** Alex set it to "ask via popup" - can be quite noisy, but avoids trouble when KDevelop or something associated itself with Makefiles or so
 +
** Agreement that flexibility is fine - see no case for changing the default
  
 
<hr/>
 
<hr/>
'''Nov 24, 2010:''' - McQ, Dani, John, Martin, Jeff
+
'''January 26, 2016''' - Dani, McQ, Alex, Martin, Lars
* Dani - '''New PDE Leadership''' - nominated on PDE list, should formally accept nomination
+
* Official PMC representation on AC calls - keep McQ listed since he is interested but nominate Dani instead of John
* Dani - '''Martin not listed as PMC member in Portal''' - AI Martin send message to EMO
+
* Next round of FEEP coming up - discussed pro and cons
* John - {{bug|330534}} '''JDT vs OT/J discussion''' - Agreement that the proposed solution makes sense for now
+
* Dani: busy week for the team: Mars.2 (4.5.2) RC2 and Neon (4.6) M5 due this Friday - on track
* Martin - {{bug|330310}} '''Feature Removal''' (Help Capability Filter)
+
** We don't have an official policy regarding feature removal
+
** John: Features are much more subjective than API
+
** Martin thinks that even though subjective - when something is deliberately removed the Community should be informed
+
** McQ: Talking is good - but in the end those who do the work should not be hindered too much on innovation
+
** John - a minimal step when removing something should include filing a bug as a place for discussion
+
** Common Sense might be good enough (no need for an official policy)
+
* John - {{bug|324772}} Group membership updates - Recommend moving Ufacekit to e4, portal being updated
+
  
 
<hr/>
 
<hr/>
'''Nov 17, 2010:''' - McQ, Dani, John, Martin
+
'''January 19, 2016''' - Dani, Alex, Martin
* Dani: '''Java 7''' - how to enable new features without breaking adopters
+
* Upstaffing PMC - meet next week
* Martin: '''PMC membership''' - Martin to contact EMO, McQ to contact Steve N
+
* Update Eclipse PMC representation on the AC
* McQ: {{bug|330312}} '''Object Teams JDT Fork'''
+
** Since only Alex will represent the Eclipse PMC at EclipseCon, should push for not making formal decisions unless there is remote attendance support
** Aspects can also change other's code and this can't be prohibited; but using others' namespace makes the fork indistinguishable from the original
+
* Dani: {{bug|485429}} '''PDE Build''' - looks like a lot of people still use it; OK if moving to a different component, but there's still a dependency:
** Even without the end user problem, people create their dependencies with some slack so there is risk getting the wrong version
+
** Plugin or feature export still needs PDE Build -- Whoever wants to remove it, will need to implement a replacement '''in the Platform'''
** On the Tools PMC, namespace re-use was also discouraged
+
** Alex: Platform build currently does double bootstrapping Tycho already ... making this more complex would be a problem
** Bug is owned by AC, Martin thinks we can close the bug as "no namespace re-use on the release train. ever."
+
** Introducing other build system into the Platform would be a wrong approach
** But we do want to help adopters get what they need, ie discuss alternative ideas.
+
** Will go ahead with what we have for 4.6
* John: {{bug|329191}} '''EMF Dependency in SDK 4.1'''
+
* Alex: As of today's GTK3 build, Eclipse is working fine on Wayland :) thanks to a number of fixes in GTK
** Turned out that not only 4.1 but also a couple other +1 projects depend on EMF ... Ed Merks suggests making EMF Core a +0 project
+
** Some GTK developers are now considering Eclipse as part of their regression suite :)
* John: '''Build Quality of Service'''
+
* SWT move to Java 7 was much appreciated; moving forward, how to deal with functional interfaces ?
** Foundation horsepower seems to be OK. David W suggests starting to measure build capacity.
+
* Alex would be interested in some styling support in SWT - would simplify some things, at least on GTK
** Measures to limit build access/times have been discussed, but no plans to implement any at the moment.
+
** Could be a very simple API like setStyle(String) - win32 also seems to have some styling support
* McQ: '''Target Operating Environments'''
+
* Martin: '''Stability of GTK3 on Mars.2 ?'''
** All 3.7 on GTK - good; Ubuntu switching to new non-remote X server; GTK3 has been resurrected .. could have an impact if it picks up speed, might destabilize linux
+
** Alex: Many distros do their own hacks, so hard to tell... Mars.2 should be stable on every distro that has a stable GTK3 distro without too many patches
* Martin: '''Pawel approved''' to assume Platform/Debug leadership, official nomination process ongoing on component list
+
** Can't recommend GTK3 on Ubuntu yet; few things improved lately, but still causes troubles whenever Ubuntu updates their GTK, requires more fixes in SWT; Kubunutu and derivatives might be even worse
 +
*** Good news is that GTK3.16 dropped support for custom theming engines - causes some ugliness but at least it's stable
 +
** Debian or SuSE should be OK;
 +
** Expect Neon GTK3 to be more stable everywhere than GTK2
  
 
<hr/>
 
<hr/>
'''Nov 10, 2010:''' - Martin, Dani, McQ, John
+
'''January 12, 2016''' - McQ, Dani, Alex, Martin
* McQ: '''Platform/Debug Leadership''' - to mention at the Arch call
+
* Dani: '''Upstaffing the PMC'''
* John: '''UNIX Groups''' - progressing well. Want to match reality.
+
** Considering "one-time invitation" to get to know candidates better; not so comfortable with a "trial period"
 +
* Dani: '''Remove Kim Moir from Platform Releng''' - ideally talk to Kim before moving forward
 +
* Dani: {{bug|485429}} '''Remove PDE Build from our drops?'''
 +
** Removing PDE Build is one thing - adding a different technology would be wrong, as wrong as adding EGit
 +
** McQ and Dani will reach out inside IBM;
 +
** Patches are still being submitted; middle ground would be remove from the delivery but keep in repo (and deprecate since not adding features)
 +
* Dani: {{bug|485257}} '''Copyright Policy Change''' - waiting on EMO/Legal input
 +
* Alex: '''Updating SWT to Java7'''
 +
* McQ: '''Travel for EclipseCon'''
  
 
<hr/>
 
<hr/>
'''Nov 3, 2010:''' - Jeff, McQ, Martin, Dani, John
+
'''January 5, 2016''' - McQ, Dani
* {{bug|329191}} - Eclipse 4.x, EMF and version ranges
+
* Dani: '''PMC Membership'''
** Have been talking about line-ups with p2 for years: Platform "product" as a line-up of pieces
+
* John: '''Commit Rights''' and group cleanup
+
** How to inform affected committers?
+
** We cannot have commit rights just disappear without making all reasonable efforts contacting them (use Foundation DB to get E-Mail addresses)
+
  
 
<hr/>
 
<hr/>
'''Oct 27, 2010:''' - Jeff, McQ, Dani, Martin, John
+
'''December 15, 2015''' - McQ, Dani, Martin, Alex
* Jeff: '''Security Issue with Jetty in IDE Help''' - returning JSP source code rather than content in some cases (very hard to reproduce)
+
* No calls until Jan.5
* '''Build Times and Eclipse QoS for Builds''' - build times vary between 1 and 4 hours
+
* Looking for a new PMC member
** Mike M: Does the team have any idea for how to re-implement the build? - Stick with PDE Build + Hudson for now
+
** Jeff: Tycho/Maven might be viable if Sonatype showed up to help - Buckminster is more about orchestration than build
+
** Martin: What's the motivation for asking a change? - Long term support strategy...
+
 
+
  
 
<hr/>
 
<hr/>
'''Oct 20, 2010:''' - Jeff, McQ, Dani
+
'''December 8, 2015''' - McQ, Alex, John, Dani
* Eclipse foundation needs to help us get access to JSRs for Java 7
+
* Discussed {{bug|483803}} regarding the BREE for org.eclipse.core.jobs.
 +
** PMC decided to move it back to JavaSE-1.7 but keep databinding on JavaSE-1.8
 +
* Dani: Reminder: {{bug|475185}} Plan Update 1 - Due with Neon M4 next week
  
 
<hr/>
 
<hr/>
'''Oct 13, 2010:''' - John, Jeff, Martin, McQ, Dani
+
'''December 1, 2015''' - McQ, Alex, Martin, Dani
* Martin: '''Hard to get a complete list of all applicable license texts''' - neither IP log helps here, nor mining all the about.html's (hard to find duplicates)
+
* McQ: The new 5-Dollar Raspberry Pi and Orion (Java server works just fine on the Pi2).  
** Jeff: Wayne is writing a tool to validate IP logs - might be related
+
** Node server is a bit smaller but single-user and no git - nice for developing node apps though
** Jeff: Some work in p2 to collect / characterize license data, but only for feature license (umbrella thing). p2 metadata allows having multiple licenses, but that's not currently
+
* Dani: '''Mars.2 Endgame Plan sent'''
** Conclusion: License info is not in a machine-readable form today. If this turns out being a problem for consumers, we may want to improve the situation.
+
* Dani: {{bug|475185}} Plan Update 1 - Due with Neon M4 next week
* Martin: '''Obsolete 3rd party libs in the IP Log'''
+
** When removing IP, add the "obsolete" keyword on ipzilla. How to deal with this while handling multiple Streams ?
+
** Hard to associate any IP Log entry with actual license / code. Would be interesting to be able and link any Ipzilla against actual about.html online in viewcvs/viewsvn etc
+
** '''AI Martin''' open an IP Discussion for this
+
* John: '''Remove "early adopter" from the 4.1 builds'''
+
** McQ is in favor, no disagreement - '''AI John/Paul''' make the change
+
  
 
<hr/>
 
<hr/>
'''Oct 6, 2010:''' - Dani, John, Jeff, Martin
+
'''November 25, 2015''' - McQ, Martin, Alex
* Feature ranges
+
* Alex: '''Bumping SWT to Java8'''
** Some projects using a buckminster capability to convert feature includes to wider ranges
+
** Lars wants to use Lambdas {{bug|481195}}; Markus keller wants static helper methods;
** This makes it hard to reproduce builds and installs
+
** Stephan Herrmann - University Research for Thread safety through typed annotations
** No longer able to install SR0 once SR1 is available
+
*** Are they ready to contribute? - Probably yes, needs to be clarified; having better dev support for Thread Safety will be a huge help
* Web pages
+
*** Dani: Thinks that going to Java8 feels a bit early for SWT, which is at the bottom of the technology stack ... would prefer 1 year later
** Jeff working with Kim and DJ to improve appearance of download pages, introduce Nova theme
+
*** John: Lambda support doesn't necessarily require SWT to be Java 8 itself (it could just be more lambda friendly)
 +
**** Won't help with base listeners, but probably with mouse events and related .. follow up in the bugreport
 +
**** Labdas are more than syntactic sugar, it's more efficient ... still there is more value in Thread safety annotations
 +
*** McQ: Assumes there would be an extensive discussion on cross-project anyways ... but there is evidence now we could get value from doing this.
 +
* Dani: '''Update on Move of platform.text'''
 +
** Approval from IP, will soon move to platform.ui - will keep platform.text bugzilla.
 +
* John: '''FEEP'''
 +
** As discussed on the [[Architecture Council]]
 +
* McQ: '''Platform Support'''
 +
** Many Platforms are not really active - IBM keeps alive some of them, for example RHEL4
 +
** Recent mailinglist asking for Mac 32bit, have we done enough on announcements ?
 +
** '''Agreement''' there's no case for catering more to people who don't read announcements and follow the project. Having a mailinglist ask once in a while is OK.
 +
** Dani: Planning Update for Neon / M4 - please comment on the bug.
 +
*** John: Plan document is not really exhaustive on the oldest working Platform - RHEL4 surely won't work in Neon.
 +
** Alex: Consider a "Build your Own" approach for the more obscure Platforms? - Frees us from keeping older binaries in sync
 +
*** Did that for ARM32 and ARM64 in master - can build by just calling maven
 +
*** McQ: Who would ever validate that scripts are still valid... (Linux community: provides no binaries at all, who validates?)
 +
*** Alex: Providing scripts is a lot less work than providing stable and widely compatible binaries (about 1/3 of the work)
  
 
<hr/>
 
<hr/>
'''Sep 29, 2010:''' - Dani, John, Martin, Jeff
+
'''November 18, 2015''' - Alex, John, Dani
* John: UNIX groups - ongoing, now with Webmaster
+
* Dani: EclipseCon NA 2016 submission from our team:
* John: Parts of e4 project now moving to git - may pave the way for more git on Eclipse later on
+
** https://www.eclipsecon.org/na2016/session/scaling-eclipse-high-dpi-dots-inch-monitors-challenges-and-solutions
** PDE Build Fetch factory for git currently exists as a patch on a bug, should live in egit - {{bug|289838}}
+
** https://www.eclipsecon.org/na2016/session/java-9-support-eclipse
* Jeff: Download page - Cluttered and hard to navigate - {{bug|326444}} for Equinox: too many columns, too much text
+
* John: mentioned FEEP
** Make it easier to find "the latest"; update the look to be more consistent with main web pages
+
** Alex has concerns that there's not an equal opportunity for everyone
** Most people just get the SDK, or the SWT downloads
+
* Alex: new Lucene version: would like to put it in
** '''AI''' File bug for discussion
+
** cross-projects has already been asked and we got no negative vote
 +
** CQs are approved
 +
** seems to be blocked by Orbit
 +
** ==> Alex to find out why and report back next week in the PMC call
  
 
<hr/>
 
<hr/>
'''Sep 22, 2010:''' - Dani, Jeff, Martin, John
 
* John: 3.7 -> 4.1 EPP upgrade - idea is to just upgrade the Platform (not a long-term, but interim idea)
 
** Goal is increasing the usage of 4.1, without further producing full EPP's
 
* Dani: How to move forward with UNIX group restructuring
 
** Wait for the build.e.o problems to get resolved, then John to follow up with Denis (via the discussion bug), once there is a concrete suggestion of what is desired in terms of ACL's
 
* John: M2a rebuild - anything we can do to reduce the chance of getting such bugs in the future?
 
** No-Reference analysis warnings were turned off in the past since there were too many false positives
 
** Dani - Bytecode are independent of warnings, there's really 2 issues:
 
*** (a) compiler only changed every 6 weeks, earlier compiler adoption would have found this earlier
 
*** (b) bytecode comparison after builds ?
 
*** John: using the new p2 every week turned out to be too volatile (but compiler may be more stable)
 
**** Goal of updating basebuilder more often would be adding "compile Eclipse" as a big testcase for the compiler
 
** '''AI John''' to discuss with Kim
 
  
<hr/>
+
'''November 11, 2015''' - McQ, John, Dani
'''Sep 15, 2010:''' - Dani, Jeff, McQ, John
+
* Discussed new meeting time that works for Martin
* Moving up to ICU4J 4.6 which requires Java 5
+
** John to send a note that proposes Tuesday, 11:00 EST / 17:00 CET (starting in two weeks)
** We are stuck on old version of ICU4J unless we can move to Java 5
+
* John: Alex mentioned at EclipseCon that there's no one in SWT team overlooking cross-platform, e.g. to craft new APIs
** We previously agreed moving to Java 5 is ok - no complaints here
+
** owning one platform is a full-time job
** Need to document the steps for someone running RCP on Foundation 1.1 - have to switch to older version of ICU4J
+
** would need another person in SWT
** This will enable us to consume future ICU4J versions that may be able to split large timezone data into a separately consumable piece.
+
** for now one of the two co-leads needs to own that task - Dani to talk to Pradeep and the co-leads
* Unix groups
+
* John to Dani: how was EclipseCon
** Preference is to avoid multiple votes
+
** Dani: Great! Lots of talking to people; spent quite some time at the Hackathon; only saw 4 talks
** Try to use ACLs to enable multiple groups for some directories
+
** If this is too complex, then have two groups but not expose two votes. I.e., when a committer is approved, we need to tell webmasters to add "common" along with whatever component they are being added to.
+
* Release train and 3.7/4.1 split
+
** Planning council working out how to handle 3.7/4.1 split
+
** Some argued that having 4.1 EPP packages would greatly improve adoption
+
** Being able to "one click" upgrade from 3.7->4.1 EPP not too bad and greatly reduces dis/mirror footprint (for example a link in welcome page)
+
  
 
<hr/>
 
<hr/>
  
'''Sep 8, 2010:''' - John, Jeff, McQ
+
'''October 28, 2015''' - McQ, John, Alex, Dani
* Discussed reception of 4.0 release.
+
* Dani: Discuss new meeting time that works for Martin
** We probably overdid the caution and it appears to be getting very little use
+
** decided that John will send out a doodle poll
** Will encourage Eclipse project developers to use 4.1 builds to help find and iron out bugs
+
* Dani: Discuss our position regarding the removal of committer emeritus ({{bug|480670}})
* Discussed [[Eclipse/PMC/Unix Groups]] again
+
** everyone agreed that we would like to keep this for the following reasons:
** Need to resolve with webmasters how to handle "common" things. Entered {{bug|324772}} to iron out details with web master
+
*** it is a good way reward those committers who invested lots of their time and made significant contributions to a project
* John asked for input on draft Indigo plan
+
*** it makes no sense to remove something that currently works and ask projects to maintain this on their website
* Discussed how to better handle ECF contributions
+
** we have to make sure that the emeritus list doesn't get stale
** Either ECF needs to be done earlier, or we have to live with our dates slipping
+
** Need to work together to see if we can improve contribution process
+
** We need to at least make sure they are in the loop on our build and end-game schedules
+
* Jeff mentioned target platform management in PDE has a few holes. Will have a follow-up call to dive into details with PDE committers.
+
 
+
  
 
<hr/>
 
<hr/>
  
'''Sep 1, 2010:''' - John, Jeff, Dani
+
'''October 21, 2015''' - McQ, Alex, Dani
* Discussed [[Eclipse/PMC/Unix Groups]]
+
* Dani: so far no negative vote in the vote to move platform.text into platform.ui
** Agreed with general direction about greatly reducing number of groups
+
* McQ: Martin can no longer join, McQ would like to move the meeting
** Dani proposed some changes to text and search components, which have since been incorporated into the doc
+
** detailed several alternatives but no fit yet
 +
** decided to continue the discussion in our next meeting
  
 
<hr/>
 
<hr/>
  
'''Aug 25, 2010:''' - Dani, Martin
+
'''October 14, 2015''' - McQ, John, Alex, Dani
* Dani - 3.6.1 looks ok - no other topics
+
* Dani: Community asked to move platform.text into platform.ui (see [https://dev.eclipse.org/mhonarc/lists/platform-text-dev/msg00484.html https://dev.eclipse.org/mhonarc/lists/platform-text-dev/msg00484.html])
 +
** 3 solutions:
 +
*** make the move
 +
*** make a more radical move to merge everything into 'Platform'
 +
*** leave things as is and let new people join platform.text
 +
** McQ: merging everything together is not an option. Skills are too different. Resources, Debug and SWT need to be kept separate.
 +
** Dani: fine with the move as long as it does not serve as argument to merge everything into one pot
 +
** Alex: committers need to accept the move
 +
** PMC decision: OK with the move but Dani to ask the platform.text and platform.ui committers whether they are both OK with it. Dani to become co-lead of Platform UI
 +
 
 +
* John from Board Meeting: Eclipse Foundation wants to change perception that Eclipse is just an IDE. Therefore they would like to change the name of our project ("Eclipse").
 +
** McQ:
 +
*** this will not be for free. The name is used at many places (code, webpage, Help) and also by companies in their marketing
 +
*** maybe we just have to accept we made a mistake in the beginning and now live with it
 +
*** can't think of a good name - which indicates we shouldn't change it ("Platform" is not good and "Eclipse SDK" or "Eclipse IDE" hide that it is the base for "RCP" apps)
 +
** decided to talk about this again in the next call
  
 
<hr/>
 
<hr/>
'''Aug 18, 2010:''' - Dani, John, Martin
+
 
* John - '''Eclipse 3.x and 4.0''' and the Release Train
+
'''October 7, 2015''' - McQ, John, Alex, Dani, Martin
** Early feedback from 4.0 adopters is that most stuff actually works when dropping in binaries (talking binary compatibility, not source compatibility)
+
* Dani: '''{{bug|108668}} Default Text Encoding UTF-8 ?'''
** Martin is concerned that dropping binaries built against 3.x into 4.0 will fail late at runtime only, due to use of internals
+
** On Linux and Mac, the Platform encoding is UTF-8 ; on Windows it's Cp1252 in most countries around the globe, even with Windows 10
** John suggests API usage scan to understand issues early
+
** Using the Platform encoding ensures interoperability with all local tools (editors, compilers, ...)
** Martin is more interested in source compatibility (build against 4.0) - can this be made super simple?
+
*** '''Desire for UTF-8 only for Windows exchanging files with users on other systems'''
 +
*** '''Changing the encoding of an existing workspace after the fact is a no go''' (risk of data corruption when loading/saving a file, some encodings are lossy)
 +
*** '''Using an encoding different than the OS encoding is problematic too''' (risk of data corruption when importing or D&D files from the OS)
 +
** Proposal 1: UTF-8 on new empty workspaces on Windows ? --&gt; Might mean that external tools don't work as expected
 +
** Proposal 2: Make users aware (Restore Oomph Welcome, which was disabled via {{bug|459486}}) ? --&gt; But many users don't understand implications, other tools also don't do this
 +
** Proposal 3: Ask for encoding when team-sharing since only team-shared projects cause issues (eg EGit hook) ? --&gt; But on "push" it may be too late
 +
** Martin: Encoding describes content, so should be managed with the content (as a project setting)
 +
*** '''--&gt; Proposal 4: Move to a model where we encourage setting the project-level encoding preference'''
 +
**** When creating a project, set the workspace default on project level automatically --&gt; ensures that projects remain sane over their lifetime
 +
**** For projects lacking the project-level preference, introduce a Problem Marker (Warning) with quick fix to either UTF-8 or workspace default
 +
** '''Decision:'''
 +
*** '''We won't change the workspace default''' -- no use breaking existing users
 +
*** '''We'll set the project encoding pro-actively'''
 +
** Open questions:
 +
*** Do we need tooling to convert project from encoding A to encoding B (if project preference was set incorrectly initially) ?
 +
*** Shall we try setting source encoding on drag-and-drop, or shall the project dictate the policy ?
  
 
<hr/>
 
<hr/>
'''Aug 11, 2010:''' - McQ, Martin, Dani
+
'''September 30, 2015''' - McQ, John, Alex, Dani
* McQ - '''3.7 Planning Process''' - input requested from all committers about plan items
+
* Dani: will send a note to PMC list asking to approve new Debug leadership (Sarika)
* '''Eclipse 4.0 Feedback''' - not too much seen, neither good nor bad
+
* Dani: we should finalize our API removal discussion from last week
 +
** agreed that APIs marked for removal have to be annotated with @noreference, @noextend and @noimplement
 +
** 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
  
 
<hr/>
 
<hr/>
'''Aug 4, 2010:''' - meeting cancelled
+
 
 +
'''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)
 +
 
  
 
<hr/>
 
<hr/>
'''Jul 28, 2010:''' - McQ, John, Martin, Dani, Jeff
+
'''September 16, 2015''' - John, Martin
* Discussed process for handling security patches
+
* John: '''API Removal Discussion'''
** If patches had metadata that would allow them to be flagged as security or "critical" patches, then p2 could automatically apply them on startup
+
** No urgency now -- changes have been reverted for now, and scheduled for 2017
** Deluxe solution would use out of process installer to be able to repair corrupt install that can't even start
+
** Updating the major of a bundle knowingly breaks everyone/most adopters
** Simple solution is to put patches in the eclipse/updates/3.6 repository and users need to apply them manually
+
*** In the past, breaking changes have often been small enough to work without increasing the major
* McQ gave a summary of the state of the Eclipse SDK 4.0 release (see his later [http://dev.eclipse.org/blogs/mcqjustmcq/2010/07/28/growing-the-future/ blog post]).
+
*** One can argue that removing TableTreeViewer is big enough to warrant updating the major
* Discussed possibility of facet work moving to e4
+
** Versioning packages has not been done in the past due to the huge upcoming maintenance effort when starting to do so
** Need to be clear on what would be required to migrate it to the platform
+
** "Release Version" is decoupled from "bundle versions" already (and may move to date-based versions eg "2016.1" with rolling updates moving forward
** Have separate call with Konstantin to discuss
+
** --&gt; will have more discussion next week
* Discussed state of builds moving to Foundation infrastructure
+
** Could explore migrating build to different build technology such as Buckminster or Tycho if it provides any benefit
+
** Concern about the build/test machines becoming a bottleneck as more projects move to it
+
** Still need to run performance tests on IBM hardware for now because virtualized machine is not consistent enough
+
  
 
<hr/>
 
<hr/>
'''Jul 21, 2010:''' - McQ, John, Martin, Dani
+
'''September 9, 2015''' - Dani, Alex, Martin, John, McQ
* McQ - '''State of Eclipse 4.0'''
+
* John: '''Planning Council Updates'''
** Not where we'd like us to be, but converging fast and there seem no issues blocking shipping
+
** 4 planned releases (March, June, September, December -- essentially end of each quarter) with flexible contents
** Not slowing down people any more, and get some new capabilities (view tear-off etc)
+
** Mid December rather than end to avoid churn, so this one is a little shorter
** Should we have 3.7 and 4.1 release trains? allow projects to choose? - Discussions ongoing with PC, Foundation (enough resources to support this?)
+
** Only June is "major" - allowing to drop off, or breaking changes; others are "minor"
* John - '''Eclipse 4.0 Release Review'''
+
** 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
** Need to go public now to have 1-week review period
+
 
* Dani - need to start publishing the '''3.6.1 freeze plan'''
+
* Software is getting more important - would be good to better support multicore
* Dani - '''separate groups for resources and runtime'''
+
 
** Too small micro-components make operation harder
+
* John: '''IntelliJ change in licensing / sales model'''
** McQ 0, Martin 0, Dani +1, John +1 (but strive for more simplicity on other areas)
+
** Many eclipse-positive comments on the announcement blog
* Vacations - McQ 2 weeks off starting Aug 16
+
** Possibility putting Money on Eclipse Development may become interesting for companies in this context
  
 
<hr/>
 
<hr/>
'''Jul 14, 2010:''' - McQ, Martin, Dani
+
'''September 2, 2015''' - Dani, Alex, Martin, John
* Dani - '''Problem launching Oracle/Sun jre6u21 on Windows'''
+
* Dani: '''EclipseDay India''' on Saturday, 200 attendees wanted to join, hat to cut to 150
** {{bug|319514}} Quickly runs out of Permgen space, because the vendor name has changed and so the -XXPermGen flag is not appended
+
** Keynote by Mike Milinkovich - large Community
** Put in a quick workaround for 3.6.1, patch ahead of time (some people wanted a 3.6a but we don't think that's worth the ripple)
+
 
** Most commercial products ship a VM, so likely not as bad as thought
+
* Dani: '''Policy for and Mars.2'''
*** Very natural that failure can happen when we don't control the VMs and the VM has custom arguments
+
** Do we want to stick to the "Service" model or allow feature updates ?
** Only a windows issue for now (Linux parses version and looks for "hotspot")
+
** Mars.1 winding down -- sticking to "Critical Fixes Only" for that
** Martin: Placing a .hotspotrc file somewhere is another possible workaround
+
** Too much in the maintenance stream causes risk of defocus ... are there relevant features that are worth the extra effort ?
** Dani and Martin propose updating the FAQ, adding a Readme section, circulating the information about workarounds should be sufficient.
+
** 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)
  
 
<hr/>
 
<hr/>
'''Jul 7, 2010:''' - McQ, Jeff, Martin, John, Dani
+
'''August 19, 2015''' - Alex, Dani
* McQ - '''Graduating e4 without changing the name'''
+
* nothing to discuss
** Jeff - a little effort upfront on messaging may pay off really big in the longer run ... picking up 4.0 without proper messaging may end up in lot negative press
+
** eg messages about the state of Performance, BIDI, ... cf Eclipse 4.0 "Early Adopter Release"
+
* Dani - '''BREE to 1.5 for JDT-UI''', what is the process?
+
** '''approved''', all in favor, eat our own dogfood, 1.6 does not provide much benefit
+
* Dani - '''Checkin Policies for 3.6.1 Maintenance Stream'''
+
** We should have more control over what goes into M-builds .. what's the least intrusive way doing so?
+
** McQ suggests M7-ish policies + endgame . Dani suggests mandatory 1-committer code review. Martin requires fix verification.
+
** Bring up the topic on Arch call, since committers are affected .. the goal is keeping quality high and having change control.
+
  
 
<hr/>
 
<hr/>
'''Jun 30, 2010:''' - McQ, Dani, John
+
'''August 12, 2015''' - John, Dani
* No negative response yet about switching to Java 6 reference platforms
+
* John asked whether we run on Windows 10
** Components free to move up but not a free-for-all. Justify reasons for moving up on eclipse-pmc mailing list.
+
** 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)
** In many cases there is little added benefit of Java 6 so Java 5 is more likely as a bundle execution environment
+
** ''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".''
* 4.0 release and bundle/package naming
+
* Dani would like to get plan feedback by Friday EOD
** Agreed that we will not migrate bundle/package namespaces at this time
+
** e4 API is not ready so the separation is helpful to divide it from the mature API
+
** It is not simply a package name issue, there are also class names containing "e4". Need to work through the process of merging the new API with the old, but this will take time
+
  
 
<hr/>
 
<hr/>
'''Jun 23, 2010:''' - Jeff, John
+
'''August 5, 2015''' - McQ, John, Dani, Alex, Martin
* No topics
+
* 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 [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/>
'''Jun 16, 2010:''' - McQ, Martin, Dani, Jeff
+
'''July 15, 22 and 29, 2015''' -- no meeting
* McQ - '''Java 4 going away''' (was EOL since October 2008, Java 5 EOL since October 2009)
+
** Dani: Don't bump up any BREBump up to 1.5 only if needed
+
** Jeff: If moving off 1.4, why not move up to 1.6 ?
+
*** Reality is that we want the tiny Foundatation-1.1 or the big wad, and 1.5 is no better than 1.6
+
*** Equinox may start using Generics and down-compile to 1.4 ... think about what's in ercp
+
** Start a cross-project discussion... question is whether everyone who depends on Platform has 1.6 VM Support
+
** Martin has no problem with 1.6, suggest asking on cross-project / some of the bigger players (e.g. Jetty, Modeling, ...)
+
*** McQ to ask Boris bring up with the Board
+
* Martin, Jeff, Dani vacation next 2 weeks (likely not on the call).
+
  
 
<hr/>
 
<hr/>
'''Jun 9, 2010:''' - Martin, Dani, McQ, John
+
'''July 8, 2015''' - McQ, Dani, John, Martin, Alex
* Dani - '''Approval for Docs''' - flexibility around docs is good, but after RC4 is too late.
+
* John: '''Cross-Language Tooling Discussion''' on the eclipse.org-architecture-council and ide-dev mailing lists
* Dani - '''Re-Opening HEAD''' - basically OK, to be discussed at the Arch call.
+
* decided to cancel the upcoming July meetings
* McQ - '''Shutting down status messages''' for rest of the month except for really noteworthy things.
+
  
 
<hr/>
 
<hr/>
'''Jun 2, 2010:''' - Martin, Dani, McQ, John, McQ
+
'''July 1, 2015''' -- no meeting
* Dani - '''ECF Issues''': Why does Eclipse have a process with Approvals while ECF does not. At the moment, there is a mutual dependency.
+
** Once we decided to consume them, we have no control over their rules.
+
** Our only option is not consuming late changes from them (and thus burn the community and them).
+
** John - there are some cases where we could push back a bit more (without going to the limit of not consuming at all).
+
** Problems have been due to the build (and not due to quality issues in their code). But this doesn't change the fact that '''ANY''' late binding change is work and risk and should thus be pushed back if possible.
+
** McQ would like to be more flexible accepting changes .. are we becoming too stiff? ie. do what we can to mitigate risk, but live with taking risk .. that's part of the Eclipse Way.
+
* John - '''Builds after RC4'''
+
** Need PMC agreement. John going to discuss cross-project criteria.
+
** McQ doesn't want to tie our release to the winds of others (outside Eclipse) getting back to us or not. '''We should not be asking cross-project for approval.'''
+
** Each project is going to do what makes most sense to them (including us). In favor of having the conversation, but not asking for approval.
+
* John - '''When to start 3.7 and 3.6.1 builds''' - defer to next week.
+
  
 
<hr/>
 
<hr/>
'''May 26, 2010:''' - Dani, McQ, Martin, Jeff, John
+
'''June 24, 2015''' - McQ, Dani, Martin, Alex
* Brief meeting. John just mentions that there's surprisingly many "Critical" bugs. Maybe just a triage problem. Will bring up in Arch call.
+
* 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)
  
 
<hr/>
 
<hr/>
'''May 19, 2010:''' - Dani, McQ, Martin, Jeff, John
+
'''June 17, 2015''' - Dani, John, Martin, Alex
* John - {{bug|27930}} '''Naming of Eclipse Classic'''
+
* John: '''Mars''' Platform in good shape for Mars - EPP respin for Error Reporting
** McQ - No other package on that page is the output of a single project, would want to see Eclipse SDK removed from packages page
+
* Dani: '''Crashes with Java 8''' - Potentially will add to the online README
** Jeff - "RCP/Plugin Developer" used to be direct replacements (SDK + Mylyn + XML Editor), but now also includes RAP (217MB)
+
** Happens in the JIT, with latest Oracle Java 8 (with 8 Cores and very specific circumstances)
** Dani - Some people go to downloads/ and then look for a milestone
+
** See {{Bug|465693}} - Probably https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8078262
** "Development Builds" tab provides access to milestones of packages; "Projects" tab provides access to direct project output.
+
* Alex: '''XDG Application''' - looks like Docker but a similar idea
** '''Resolution:''' 650.000 people have downloaded classic (#2 download), even scrolling down - changing this is a waste.
+
** Environment description of the runtime - helps specifying the line-up of library versions that we test against and use
* Dani - {{bug|313524}} '''Preference for new API Constant''' for the Formatter (also [https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=59891#c45 bug 59891 comment 45] and onwards)
+
** Big part of GNOME / GTK already pushing for it, might make sense to consider alignment
** Some people don't like the new look (method wrapping) - currently no way to have the formatter behave the same in 3.5 and 3.6
+
** GNOME working towards compiling with a really old compiler, such that the physically identical bits can run against a large set of distros
** '''Resolution:''' pmc+ since little effort avoids lot of churn. Keeping the functionality without allowing to disable is a no-go.
+
** See https://wiki.gnome.org/Projects/SandboxedApps
* Martin - '''Feedback channel for removing API''' process (e.g. {{bug|311931}})
+
** But if you want to try it out please read https://blogs.gnome.org/alexl/2015/06/17/testing-rawhide-apps-using-xdg-app/  
** '''Resolution:''' Add a suggestion to the [[Eclipse/API Central/API Removal Process]] page to start fresh for the feedback channel if there's a lot of discussion on the existing bug (by bugzilla clone)
+
* John - '''4.0 topics'''
+
** FYI: Ian created a draft of a [http://www.eclipse.org/helios/eclipse-sdk-4.0/ landing page]. Working on a [http://wiki.eclipse.org/Eclipse/Eclipse_SDK_4.0_FAQ release FAQ] page
+
  
 
<hr/>
 
<hr/>
'''May 12, 2010:''' - McQ, Martin, John, Jeff, Dani
+
 
* Remaining work for Release - John: Checklist (Docs, collective N&N etc... IP Logs end May)
+
'''June 10, 2015''' - Dani, Alex, Martin
** [[Eclipse/Release checklist]], and [[Eclipse Doc Checklist]]. '''AI Dani''' has another one for Docs - will update for 3.6 and send offline
+
* Dani: 4.5RC4 looking good, no more fixes planned
** [[Platform-releng-faq#Eclipse_Release_checklist]] also links to [[3.3 Release checklist]]
+
* Dani: Working on Java 9 feature patch
* IP Logs for subprojects - '''AI Jeff''' talk to Wayne to allow IP logs for container projects, also ask Boris (committer rep) - unsure if we have a committer rep on the IP Advisory committee, but we should have
+
* Alex: PC discussing a change in the release train
* Eclipse SDK 4.0 Naming
+
** Current common ground seems to be a request for more release points, and projects could decide whether they do features or maintenance
** John - from Mailing List discussion, "Eclipse SDK 4.0 Early Adopter Release" seemed to be the favorite one
+
** From Platform point of view, stability is key. Some key contributors not interested doing
** Next year's release will be 4.1. Ian going to prepare a landing page to send the right message, working with Boris and John
+
** Martin: How to also cater to contributors who want their contributions released soon ?
* API Deletion - luceneSearchParticipant
+
*** Martin Idea: With Tycho, building the Platform is easier so ask contributors build themselves
** Deprecation should include a migration path (if it exists).
+
*** Or, open up a new "experimental" stream ?
** Will document deletions in the migration guide (and probably also in the README)
+
*** Dani Idea: Market milestone builds differently, as "fully consumable" would serve the same purpose
** Martin: Add a Bugzilla Keyword for API Deletions, will make it very easy to create a query for all pending API deletions
+
* Martin: Tested eclipse-installer (Oomph), looking really really good now
** Jeff: Whatever we do, current deletions should be examplary.
+
  
 
<hr/>
 
<hr/>
'''May 5, 2010:''' - McQ, Martin, John, Dani
+
'''June 3, 2015''' - Alex, Dani, Martin, McQ, John
* Martin - {{bug|309059}} root cert validity? - Tom investigating, no new info
+
* Dani: '''Mars Endgame'''
* Martin - How to mark issues for [[Polish3.6]] (UNC issues, Launcher vmargs {{bug|149994}}) - who sets the Bugzilla polish kwd?
+
* Dani: Please vote for release review
** Martin to bring up again, and add to the Polish Wiki, and add the polish keyword on bz.
+
** Any Eclipse Platform committer is allowed to suggest items that bug him personally on the polish list (against any component).
+
* John - Helios Plan update
+
* John - API Removal
+
  
 
<hr/>
 
<hr/>
'''Apr 28, 2010:''' - Jeff, Martin, John, McQ, Dani
+
'''May 20, 2015''' - Dani, Alex, Martin, McQ
* Martin - '''[[Eclipse/UNC_Paths]]''' - testing for 3.6 ? Bugzilla: [https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/buglist.cgi?query_format=advanced&short_desc_type=allwords&short_desc=unc&classification=Eclipse&classification=RT&product=Equinox&product=Platform&product=JDT&bug_status=UNCONFIRMED&bug_status=NEW&bug_status=ASSIGNED&bug_status=REOPENED&product=PDE All open with UNC in the summary]
+
* Dani: '''Security Update''' - Platform work done, Orbit updated, reached out to Wayne and other affected projects.
** Especially {{bug|289322}} and {{bug|262601}} are blocking for Martin, because these make it impossible to have Eclipse installed on an UNC path (common scenario in large organizations)
+
* Dani: '''RC2 Build''' - too many bugs assigned, Lars on Vacation, Dani will fill in
** Consensus: ''No concerted effort'', there are likely other more pressing issues; but ''investigate and prioritize what we find, and fix if possible''.
+
* McQ: '''Too Many Platforms Built?''' - Who's really hurt by "too many builds" ?
** <b><i>Running on UNC is considered a Polish item</i></b>.
+
** Will meet with Mike & Foundation tomorrow, Alex is also interested (Dani to check).
* Jeff, McQ - '''Eclipse 4.0 Naming'''
+
** Suggestion: "Eclipse 4.0 Indigo Preview"
+
** McQ: Don't want to send a negative message - it ''is'' usable though add-on support may be missing
+
** John: This is a new release of the Platform, but not all of Eclipse Foundation technology... unsure how to phrase that into a release name
+
** Jeff: Based on this, putting Indigo into the name is a negative and may trigger false assumptions
+
** McQ: ''Eclipse SDK 4.0 Developer Release'' - sends the right message
+
** Jeff: '''Come up with 3 or 4 suggestions and bounce these around'''. Start a public discussion. Check with other OSS projects, e.g. Andrew Overholt
+
* McQ - '''1.5 BREE for Resources to support Unicode Characters'''
+
** Suggest everything on top of the base RCP move up to 1.5
+
** Jeff: "Move when you need to and not before" - when do we "need to"
+
* John - '''[[Eclipse/API Central/API Removal Process]]
+
** Just a compilation of things discussed before. '''Discuss on the Mailing List'''
+
* McQ - '''Pascal as the OBR spec lead'''
+
** From point of view of the Eclipse Project, can't imagine what value we'd get from participating in OBR spec. IBM might care.
+
  
 
<hr/>
 
<hr/>
'''Apr 21, 2010:''' - Jeff, Martin, John, Dani, McQ
+
'''May 13, 2015''' - McQ, John, Alex, Martin
* John - extended '''2 day test pass''' for M7 on Mon and Tue
+
* John, Dani - Mars Endgame looking good
* Jeff - '''Eclipse 4.0 naming'''
+
* Alex - {{bug|465874}} Lucene 5 looking good, almost done - Ready to commit as soon as CQs are in and Mars+1 is open
** McQ hopes that Eclipse 4.0 will be good enough for public consumption - whatever we call it, it needs to be what we call it
+
* JDT for Java 9 - will need a wider discussion with EMO on make it easier to publish the work, e.g. in normal builds
** Jeff - the message should be that it's (a) new, (b) cool, (c) not quite done yet
+
** McQ - 4.0 won't be as performant as 3.x. Users will see the new cool presentation, but other than that it's like 3.6
+
** Biggest problem will be people who don't follow the Community and just get 4.0 because they heard about it
+
** Jeff - Comes down to setting expectations. Naming is one aspect of this, there's other aspects.
+
** John - Ian organized an e4-evangelist call.
+
** McQ - Most people will just consume the release train (Helios) anyways, and will notice that 4.0 is "different".
+
* Martin - {{bug|306822}} '''IncrementalBuilder.getRule()''' API addition: Ask James whether CDT Helios can pick up the change
+
* Martin - '''James for committer''' - move to public policy of only considering committed contributions
+
  
 
<hr/>
 
<hr/>
'''Apr 14, 2010:''' - John, Dani, Martin, Jeff
+
'''May 6, 2015''' - McQ, Dani, Martin, John
* Martin - '''Startup Performance tests''': Cold start after reboot is 20% slower in 3.6m6 compared to 3.5.2 (while warm start is about the same)
+
* Dani: '''Java 9 timing''' - slight delay
** Manual test: Reboot a minimal WinXP system, then start into a fresh workspace with 1 JDT project (20 files) 1 open file in the editor.
+
* Dani: RC1 preps
** 28 sec in 3.5.2 but 36 sec in 3.6m6. Will file a bug tomorrow.
+
** 2-day test pass went fine - 2 severe issues found, will be addressed
** John: There are 2 startup performance tests in the suite, but they are unreliable. In 3.6, changed the way tests are installed (director rather than dropins), thus baseline is not helpful.
+
** Request to watch PMC mailing list for API exceptions and defect approvals
** Jeff: Try have a look at {{Bug|308157}} Jarfile cache now limited to 100. Reason might just be cycling through more Jar's.
+
* John: '''PC Discussion on Release Cycles'''
* John, Dani - '''Polish List'''
+
** Multiple releases per year PLUS maintenance streams seems like overkill
* John - '''e4 plan update'''. Waiting on McQ, wants an accurate list on what's graduating.
+
** Consider an approach like Orion that just moves constantly forward
** Jeff - once something is in 4.0 you cannot remove in 4.x so better think twice before graduating.
+
** Especially for the Platform, being rock solid is most important. Still to attract new contributors we need to allow more frequent "feature updates".
** John - Eclipse SDK 4.0 has a minimal API exposed, most new stuff is under the covers so this is not so much of an issue.
+
*** A model where both "stable/maintenance" _and_ "features" are contributed to the train might be too much work/overhead.
** Jeff - More important to have Eclipse SDK 4.0 rock solid than have it feature complete. Do few things well rather than many things poorly.
+
*** Consider a model like Ubuntu, ... with some release numbers being "stable/LTS base" and others being "in-between feature releases" ?
** John - '''Self-hosting a day on Eclipse 4.0 without blocking issues!''' (But much to be polished, bugs, errors in the log etc).
+
*** Consider a model like LTS for maintenance fixes / aside mainstream just moving forward ?
* Jeff - '''Runtime SDK's vs "targets"''': The label SDK is ambiguous. Want to install tooling + target platform together, but cannot do that today.
+
 
** Today, we use "SDK" for (a) tools+source+docs, or (b) runtime+source+docs. None of both is really an SDK.
+
 
** Better call the target stuff just "targets".
+
'''April 15, 2015''' - Dani, John, McQ, Alex, Martin
** Developer docs as part of the tooling is wrong ... should be associated with targets instead.
+
* Dani: '''Java 1.7 Changes'''
** John: p2 does have the ability to install into multiple profiles (plan = multiple profiles)... might be (mis)used for this, is it a hack?
+
** Some bundles have been moved to a 1.7 BREE by new committers, even after API freeze
** Jeff: Much target provisioning was deferred off 3.6
+
** 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/>
 
<hr/>
'''Apr 7, 2010:''' - McQ, Dani, Martin, Jeff, John
+
'''April 8, 2015''' - Dani, Martin, Alex, John, McQ
* Builds - short call
+
* 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/>
 
<hr/>
'''Mar 31, 2010:''' - McQ, Dani, Martin, John
+
'''April 1, 2015''' - McQ, Alex, Martin, Dani (Regrets: John travelling)
* Martin - '''EclipseCon Report'''
+
* Alex: '''GTK 3.16''' seeing issues again - fixed some crashes, but scrolling is still entirely broken
** General industry trend pointing up (as perceived on the exhibition floor); e4 rover great success! other strong topics included build (b3, buckminster, maven / tycho / nexus, athena...)
+
** SWT uses a number of things that GTK declares as "implementation detail"
** e4 message in general very well positioned and received; git / egit was another hot topic
+
* PMC approval on piggyback CQ's (AC question forwarded by John)
** Modeling and RT projects in an up trend, other projects seem to go slightly down in terms of Community interest as well as commercial involvement
+
** Dani sent [https://dev.eclipse.org/mhonarc/lists/eclipse-pmc/msg02332.html our position] to John in order to update the AC
** API Tutorial very well received, Martin going to work on a "Wiki" version of checklists and guidance, will notify AC when done
+
* John - Eclipse 4.0: Timing for graduating e4 incubation material into the Eclipse proper
+
** We cannot ship an Eclipse SDK out of the e4 project
+
** Want a clear message what Eclipse 4.0 is... probably "includes incubating components" like some EPP packages
+
** '''AI John''' talk to Mike and Ian
+
  
 
<hr/>
 
<hr/>
'''Mar 17, 2010:''' - McQ, Dani, Martin
+
'''March 18, 2015''' - Dani, Alex, Martin, McQ, John
* McQ: '''git''' vs CVS: Should there be contributions by Platform on Egit?
+
* John: '''EclipseCon''' - Bigger this year due to LocationTech (750 attendees)
** Martin: Don't know how well egit proceeded recently, Boris might know more... important point is that the major workflows are perfect. Looks like the major workflows have been identified already.
+
** Mark Reinhold keynote and "after-session" on Java 9
* Martin: '''WebkitGTK / MiniBrowser''': In addition to the recent WebkitGTK discussion, perhaps work on a "Minibrowser" API that can live with published frozen Mozilla API only? Many apps may not need the full feature-richness of today's Browser.
+
** Much interest in Orion JS tooling / editor, also on desktop
** McQ unsure whether this is worthwile, since all industry trends go towards more web integration. '''AI Martin''' follow up with Grant
+
** Public face of Eclipse Platform at the conference was much more diverse than in the past (Lars Vogel, Max Anderson, Google ...)
* Dani: '''Performance and Polish''' passes
+
* Dani: {{bug|458730}} '''Mars Plan Update'''
** All teams need to fix the issues that Frederic finds. M7 is the performance and polish pass. Prioritize items.
+
* Dani: '''e4 project leadership''' approved by EMO
* Dani: '''Freeze Plan'''
+
* Dani: Szymon Brandys resigned as Platform/Resources co-lead. Need to +1 on the mailing list
** Suggest a 2-day test pass (mon/tue) before the RC's, ie move 1 day from RC2 into M7
+
  
 
<hr/>
 
<hr/>
'''Mar 10, 2010:''' - McQ, Jeff, Martin, John
+
 
* John: '''Provisional API guidelines''' (removing the requirement to have "internal" in the package name) - important for e4 which will have a lot of provisional API.
+
'''March 11, 2015 - no meeting (EclipseCon)'''
** See also {{bug|261874}} and Wiki [[Provisional API Guidelines Update Proposal]]
+
** "Old School" wanted to make provisional API deliberately painful. Migrating "provisional" to real without renaming will make breakage more subtle
+
** The game has changed: Adding x-internal, friends and API Tooling works much better than before, making it clear where API is provisional
+
** Martin: Much in favor of this, do we have any markup beyond x-internal for (a) making provisional API more explicitly visible or (b) work on a smaller granularity such as just a class?
+
*** McQ: granularity smaller than package makes it too easy to pollute API
+
*** Jeff: would like x-api-status:=provisional markup instead of x-internal:=true ... better do it right than half-baken. Could probably come to a fairly fast consensus on MANIFEST markup
+
** Resolution Lets agree now that x-internal is sufficient for provisional API, and discuss further approvements in parallel. '''AI John''' to search existing bugs about provisional API markup and initiate a discussion on the eclipse-pmc mailing list.
+
* Jeff: '''Target Provisioning and PDE:''' Target components in Galileo (which cannot be installed into the host) - came up with sort of a hack which still confuses users
+
** Want just a little bit help in PDE to make target provisioning just a little bit better .. a number of PDE bugs related to this, many been deferred .. there will be new bugs coming to capture what can be done in the short term
+
** Resolution: will mark up those new bugs where they request PMC involvement
+
* McQ: '''Build Quality:''' There is traditionally a drop in quality around this time of year (API Freeze and Eclipsecon), plus infrastructure problems. It's not really bad but we need to be careful now.
+
** John: Resist the urge to put in extra fixes. We are past the test pass. Quality over function, especially now.
+
  
 
<hr/>
 
<hr/>
'''Mar 3, 2010:''' - Dani, Martin, McQ
+
 
* Martin: Remove org.eclipse.update.configurator and related bundles from SDK? As per {{bug|304505}} it makes Eclipse slow even when off.
+
'''March 4, 2015''' - Dani, McQ, Martin, John
** Dani: Might be more than a packaging issue, somebody would have to invest
+
* Dani: '''e4 leadership''' - Dani will volunteer to co-lead
** McQ: Should fix the Performance issue at any rate, regardless of other issues.
+
* Dani: '''BREEs''' - documentation about how to pick the EE
* John sick, Dani vacation next week.
+
** 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/>
 
<hr/>
'''Feb 24, 2010:''' - Dani, Martin, McQ
+
'''February 25, 2015''' - Dani, Martin McQ
* Dani: Remove Java 7 support as a plan item due to (a) legal reasons and (b) Java 7 not being finished when Eclipse 3.6 ships
+
* No topics
  
 
<hr/>
 
<hr/>
'''Feb 17, 2010:''' - Martin, Dani, John
+
'''February 18, 2015''' - Dani, Alex, Martin
* Martin: {{bug|196337}} Pushing CDT Spawner into the Platform?
+
* Alex: '''Building Native Launchers'''
** John, Dani: Platform could only accept it when there is use for it in the SDK. Otherwise it would just bloat the Platform
+
** Current way of building is kinda unpredictable - even if getting some agreement on versions to use, results are kinda unpredictable
** Recommended best practice: Keep Spawner living in CDT, but put it into a separate bundle such that it can be used by others out of Helios or other p2 Repos
+
** Pushing towards Hudson RHEL builders at least at the EF to get more transparency and automation - attempt to mimic the infrastructure at IBM
** The [[Nexus Project]], which was once meant to collect such micro functionality to be shared between projects was never successful. Similar requests (e.g. faceted projects) are consumed as individual bundles through p2 today, no matter in which project they have their home where they are developed.
+
** Looking at 3 primary architectures (at the EF) for Linux vs. secondary architectures (non-public builders potentially)
* Martin: {{bug|301563}} Fast project import from snapshot data - UI or not?
+
* Dani: Great initiative, but other (non-EF) builders must not be broken
** John: Want some UI in the Platform in order to test it more easily, e.g. an export wizard
+
** EF doesn't allow any commercial tools (but currently, e.g. Windows launchers are built with MSVS)
* John: Webkit
+
* Alex is willing to spend time to get Linux builds running; but can't help with other architectures
** Foundation is considering allowing LGPL for exempt prereqs, but not for works-with .. missing a policy for dealing with LGPL works-with
+
** Martin: great approach - for Windows, using a cross-compiler on Linux might be interesting (after Linux native works)
** John: Our original reason for marking works-with is that the SWT browser can use either Mozilla or WebKit. However our long term direction is WebKit-only due to brittleness of the Mozilla API which keeps breaking us. There is an increasing number of distros bundling these WebKit libraries so there is a reasonable chance going forward that the library will already be present on the user's machine.
+
* 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: Exempt works-with (optional) prereq is perfectly fine for Webkit, since there is a chance it's already there on a Platform (similar to Mozilla)
+
** Martin: Checked-in binaries help consumers and contributors who just want to make a Java change
** Classifying it as such makes most sense for Product builders, who look at the prereqs to understand what they need to bundle with their Eclipse based product.
+
** Dani: Checked-in binaries are also used for comparing build results for expected vs accidental changes
** PMC agreed to reclassify these libraries as exempt pre-req.
+
 
 +
* 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/>
 
<hr/>
'''Feb 10, 2010:''' - John, Dani, McQ
+
'''February 11, 2015''' - Dani, Alex
* We agreed to list WebKitGTK and libsoup 2.4 as works-with prerequisites
+
* no topics
* We need to find consensus on {{bug|243582}} (embedding source info in binaries)
+
* Discussed moving Ubuntu version on the plan from 9.04 to 10.04. It is too early to make this decision because release candidates of 10.04 are not yet available, but we will continue to monitor it and make the decision to move up (or not) later in the 3.6 cycle
+
  
 
<hr/>
 
<hr/>
'''Feb 03, 2010:''' - Dani, Martin
+
 
* Dani: {{Bug|301563}} - Fast project import from snapshot data
+
'''February 4, 2015''' - Dani, Alex, Martin
** Has the feature been verified to really return the expected performance gain? - Martin: Yes, Cisco reports 10 minute -> 5 seconds improvement by using the feature on project import on their view (65000 files)
+
* Alex: With GTK-3.15.[345] , Eclipse is entirely unusable
** Is the feature valuable without Index contributions from JDT / CDT? - Martin: Yes, even "plain" projects benefit when there are linked resources pointing to web folders through RSE/EFS since they can be browsed immediately and refresh can be reduced to what's really needed. But most benefit is gained when there is also a shared index to be imported for immediate use.
+
** Alex has some dirty workarounds to make it start, but still many issues like trees not painted, ...
** Dani proposed checkin into a branch for easier merge / review - Martin: Will start working with patches
+
** 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
** AI Martin: Contact Sharon regarding IP review (reserve a slot)
+
* Dani: Working on Solaris 64-bit
  
 
<hr/>
 
<hr/>
'''Jan 27, 2010:''' - John, Dani, McQ, Martin
 
* Dani: Markus Keller taking over JDT UI
 
* John: M6 Splashscreen for Eclipsecon: {{bug|297355}}
 
* McQ: Removing Builds - SWT needs Linux-Motif, so only WPF about to be removed
 
** In discussions with Microsoft, it turned out that WPF is not required to get full Windows 7 experience under Win32
 
** XAML for styling was meant to be a cool idea but never got flying
 
** Socialize people with this -- find whether people are inerested in contributing on this, if yes then we should support them
 
* Still working the IBM approval process for travelling to Eclipsecon
 
* Avoid merging major feature work after a milestone's Tuesday test pass
 
  
 +
'''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/>
 
<hr/>
'''Jan 20, 2010:''' - John, Dani, McQ, Martin
 
* McQ: Contacted Steve N, still interested but unlikely to get more energy for investing into Eclipse
 
* John: 3.5.2 test pass tomorrow, but yesterday's I-build been a mess
 
* McQ: Message about supporting Open JDK in a blog ... status should be "nice that it works but it's not a reference platform"
 
  
 +
'''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/>
'''Jan 13, 2010:''' - John, Dani, McQ, Martin
 
* McQ: U Manitoba students to help with technical communication (documentation, website, ...) for e4
 
* Dani: New way of contributing Capabilities for Helios... are we OK? - John: yes, Platform Capabilities are in the SDK feature
 
** FYI: Incubating projects are
 
* Martin: Documenting the Platforms we routinely test on
 
** Unittest / Perftest machines are know. When John updated the Reference Platform doc, he made sure that he knows at least one committer on each platform
 
** A poll to know what Platform(s) are actively used (by committers) on milestone granularity would be very helpful - John going to set that up
 
  
 +
'''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/>
'''Jan 6, 2010:''' - John, Dani, McQ, Jeff
 
* Agreed on 3.5.2 [http://www.eclipse.org/eclipse/development/plans/freeze_plan_3_5_2.php freeze plan]
 
** Note RC2 is a week earlier to avoid colliding with Helios M5 week
 
* Discussed Helios plan updates 2 {{bug|298200}}
 
** Update Java 7 plan item to indicate only working on publicly available bits. Some progress made on getting access to specs but going slowly.
 
** Update reference JRE's to latest version of each JRE
 
* Jeff will be away for next six weeks (vacation)
 
* McQ to contact Steve to see if he still wishes to remain on PMC
 
  
 
= 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 2012 | Archive of Meeting Minutes from 2012]]
 +
* [[Eclipse/PMC/Minutes 2011 | Archive of Meeting Minutes from 2011]]
 +
* [[Eclipse/PMC/Minutes 2010 | Archive of Meeting Minutes from 2010]]
 
* [[Eclipse/PMC/Minutes 2009 | Archive of Meeting Minutes from 2009]]
 
* [[Eclipse/PMC/Minutes 2009 | Archive of Meeting Minutes from 2009]]

Revision as of 12:23, 2 February 2016

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

February 2, 2016 - Dani, Alex, Martin, McQ

  • Dani: Foundation Hires - Dani hopes they'll find someone in Europe to deal with Releng issues
  • Dani: Neon M5 went smoothly - M6 will be the API freeze; tomorrow is the last planned RC for Mars.2
  • Dani: CQ Deadline on Feb.12 for Neon
  • Dani: bug 486647 for changing the strategy when opening files not associated with Eclipse
    • With M5, can now use the System Editor (default) or Text Editor - there's a request to always use the text editor
    • Dani thinks that for JPG one wants to use the OS
      • Martin agrees, OpenWith and choosing an editor remembers the choice, and one can also remember;
      • We also show the System Icon in Project Explorer, so using the System Editor by default is natural
      • Alex set it to "ask via popup" - can be quite noisy, but avoids trouble when KDevelop or something associated itself with Makefiles or so
    • Agreement that flexibility is fine - see no case for changing the default

January 26, 2016 - Dani, McQ, Alex, Martin, Lars

  • Official PMC representation on AC calls - keep McQ listed since he is interested but nominate Dani instead of John
  • Next round of FEEP coming up - discussed pro and cons
  • Dani: busy week for the team: Mars.2 (4.5.2) RC2 and Neon (4.6) M5 due this Friday - on track

January 19, 2016 - Dani, Alex, Martin

  • Upstaffing PMC - meet next week
  • Update Eclipse PMC representation on the AC
    • Since only Alex will represent the Eclipse PMC at EclipseCon, should push for not making formal decisions unless there is remote attendance support
  • Dani: bug 485429 PDE Build - looks like a lot of people still use it; OK if moving to a different component, but there's still a dependency:
    • Plugin or feature export still needs PDE Build -- Whoever wants to remove it, will need to implement a replacement in the Platform
    • Alex: Platform build currently does double bootstrapping Tycho already ... making this more complex would be a problem
    • Introducing other build system into the Platform would be a wrong approach
    • Will go ahead with what we have for 4.6
  • Alex: As of today's GTK3 build, Eclipse is working fine on Wayland :) thanks to a number of fixes in GTK
    • Some GTK developers are now considering Eclipse as part of their regression suite :)
  • SWT move to Java 7 was much appreciated; moving forward, how to deal with functional interfaces ?
  • Alex would be interested in some styling support in SWT - would simplify some things, at least on GTK
    • Could be a very simple API like setStyle(String) - win32 also seems to have some styling support
  • Martin: Stability of GTK3 on Mars.2 ?
    • Alex: Many distros do their own hacks, so hard to tell... Mars.2 should be stable on every distro that has a stable GTK3 distro without too many patches
    • Can't recommend GTK3 on Ubuntu yet; few things improved lately, but still causes troubles whenever Ubuntu updates their GTK, requires more fixes in SWT; Kubunutu and derivatives might be even worse
      • Good news is that GTK3.16 dropped support for custom theming engines - causes some ugliness but at least it's stable
    • Debian or SuSE should be OK;
    • Expect Neon GTK3 to be more stable everywhere than GTK2

January 12, 2016 - McQ, Dani, Alex, Martin

  • Dani: Upstaffing the PMC
    • Considering "one-time invitation" to get to know candidates better; not so comfortable with a "trial period"
  • Dani: Remove Kim Moir from Platform Releng - ideally talk to Kim before moving forward
  • Dani: bug 485429 Remove PDE Build from our drops?
    • Removing PDE Build is one thing - adding a different technology would be wrong, as wrong as adding EGit
    • McQ and Dani will reach out inside IBM;
    • Patches are still being submitted; middle ground would be remove from the delivery but keep in repo (and deprecate since not adding features)
  • Dani: bug 485257 Copyright Policy Change - waiting on EMO/Legal input
  • Alex: Updating SWT to Java7
  • McQ: Travel for EclipseCon

January 5, 2016 - McQ, Dani

  • Dani: PMC Membership

December 15, 2015 - McQ, Dani, Martin, Alex

  • No calls until Jan.5
  • Looking for a new PMC member

December 8, 2015 - McQ, Alex, John, Dani

  • Discussed bug 483803 regarding the BREE for org.eclipse.core.jobs.
    • PMC decided to move it back to JavaSE-1.7 but keep databinding on JavaSE-1.8
  • Dani: Reminder: bug 475185 Plan Update 1 - Due with Neon M4 next week

December 1, 2015 - McQ, Alex, Martin, Dani

  • McQ: The new 5-Dollar Raspberry Pi and Orion (Java server works just fine on the Pi2).
    • Node server is a bit smaller but single-user and no git - nice for developing node apps though
  • Dani: Mars.2 Endgame Plan sent
  • Dani: bug 475185 Plan Update 1 - Due with Neon M4 next week

November 25, 2015 - McQ, Martin, Alex

  • Alex: Bumping SWT to Java8
    • Lars wants to use Lambdas bug 481195; Markus keller wants static helper methods;
    • Stephan Herrmann - University Research for Thread safety through typed annotations
      • Are they ready to contribute? - Probably yes, needs to be clarified; having better dev support for Thread Safety will be a huge help
      • Dani: Thinks that going to Java8 feels a bit early for SWT, which is at the bottom of the technology stack ... would prefer 1 year later
      • John: Lambda support doesn't necessarily require SWT to be Java 8 itself (it could just be more lambda friendly)
        • Won't help with base listeners, but probably with mouse events and related .. follow up in the bugreport
        • Labdas are more than syntactic sugar, it's more efficient ... still there is more value in Thread safety annotations
      • McQ: Assumes there would be an extensive discussion on cross-project anyways ... but there is evidence now we could get value from doing this.
  • Dani: Update on Move of platform.text
    • Approval from IP, will soon move to platform.ui - will keep platform.text bugzilla.
  • John: FEEP
  • McQ: Platform Support
    • Many Platforms are not really active - IBM keeps alive some of them, for example RHEL4
    • Recent mailinglist asking for Mac 32bit, have we done enough on announcements ?
    • Agreement there's no case for catering more to people who don't read announcements and follow the project. Having a mailinglist ask once in a while is OK.
    • Dani: Planning Update for Neon / M4 - please comment on the bug.
      • John: Plan document is not really exhaustive on the oldest working Platform - RHEL4 surely won't work in Neon.
    • Alex: Consider a "Build your Own" approach for the more obscure Platforms? - Frees us from keeping older binaries in sync
      • Did that for ARM32 and ARM64 in master - can build by just calling maven
      • McQ: Who would ever validate that scripts are still valid... (Linux community: provides no binaries at all, who validates?)
      • Alex: Providing scripts is a lot less work than providing stable and widely compatible binaries (about 1/3 of the work)

November 18, 2015 - Alex, John, Dani


November 11, 2015 - McQ, John, Dani

  • Discussed new meeting time that works for Martin
    • John to send a note that proposes Tuesday, 11:00 EST / 17:00 CET (starting in two weeks)
  • John: Alex mentioned at EclipseCon that there's no one in SWT team overlooking cross-platform, e.g. to craft new APIs
    • owning one platform is a full-time job
    • would need another person in SWT
    • for now one of the two co-leads needs to own that task - Dani to talk to Pradeep and the co-leads
  • John to Dani: how was EclipseCon
    • Dani: Great! Lots of talking to people; spent quite some time at the Hackathon; only saw 4 talks

October 28, 2015 - McQ, John, Alex, Dani

  • Dani: Discuss new meeting time that works for Martin
    • decided that John will send out a doodle poll
  • Dani: Discuss our position regarding the removal of committer emeritus (bug 480670)
    • everyone agreed that we would like to keep this for the following reasons:
      • it is a good way reward those committers who invested lots of their time and made significant contributions to a project
      • it makes no sense to remove something that currently works and ask projects to maintain this on their website
    • we have to make sure that the emeritus list doesn't get stale

October 21, 2015 - McQ, Alex, Dani

  • Dani: so far no negative vote in the vote to move platform.text into platform.ui
  • McQ: Martin can no longer join, McQ would like to move the meeting
    • detailed several alternatives but no fit yet
    • decided to continue the discussion in our next meeting

October 14, 2015 - McQ, John, Alex, Dani

  • Dani: Community asked to move platform.text into platform.ui (see https://dev.eclipse.org/mhonarc/lists/platform-text-dev/msg00484.html)
    • 3 solutions:
      • make the move
      • make a more radical move to merge everything into 'Platform'
      • leave things as is and let new people join platform.text
    • McQ: merging everything together is not an option. Skills are too different. Resources, Debug and SWT need to be kept separate.
    • Dani: fine with the move as long as it does not serve as argument to merge everything into one pot
    • Alex: committers need to accept the move
    • PMC decision: OK with the move but Dani to ask the platform.text and platform.ui committers whether they are both OK with it. Dani to become co-lead of Platform UI
  • John from Board Meeting: Eclipse Foundation wants to change perception that Eclipse is just an IDE. Therefore they would like to change the name of our project ("Eclipse").
    • McQ:
      • this will not be for free. The name is used at many places (code, webpage, Help) and also by companies in their marketing
      • maybe we just have to accept we made a mistake in the beginning and now live with it
      • can't think of a good name - which indicates we shouldn't change it ("Platform" is not good and "Eclipse SDK" or "Eclipse IDE" hide that it is the base for "RCP" apps)
    • decided to talk about this again in the next call

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

  • Dani: bug 108668 Default Text Encoding UTF-8 ?
    • On Linux and Mac, the Platform encoding is UTF-8 ; on Windows it's Cp1252 in most countries around the globe, even with Windows 10
    • Using the Platform encoding ensures interoperability with all local tools (editors, compilers, ...)
      • Desire for UTF-8 only for Windows exchanging files with users on other systems
      • Changing the encoding of an existing workspace after the fact is a no go (risk of data corruption when loading/saving a file, some encodings are lossy)
      • Using an encoding different than the OS encoding is problematic too (risk of data corruption when importing or D&D files from the OS)
    • Proposal 1: UTF-8 on new empty workspaces on Windows ? --> Might mean that external tools don't work as expected
    • Proposal 2: Make users aware (Restore Oomph Welcome, which was disabled via bug 459486) ? --> But many users don't understand implications, other tools also don't do this
    • Proposal 3: Ask for encoding when team-sharing since only team-shared projects cause issues (eg EGit hook) ? --> But on "push" it may be too late
    • Martin: Encoding describes content, so should be managed with the content (as a project setting)
      • --> Proposal 4: Move to a model where we encourage setting the project-level encoding preference
        • When creating a project, set the workspace default on project level automatically --> ensures that projects remain sane over their lifetime
        • For projects lacking the project-level preference, introduce a Problem Marker (Warning) with quick fix to either UTF-8 or workspace default
    • Decision:
      • We won't change the workspace default -- no use breaking existing users
      • We'll set the project encoding pro-actively
    • Open questions:
      • Do we need tooling to convert project from encoding A to encoding B (if project preference was set incorrectly initially) ?
      • Shall we try setting source encoding on drag-and-drop, or shall the project dictate the policy ?

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, @noextend and @noimplement
    • 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

Back to the top