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"

(469 intermediate revisions by 11 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
 
= Documents =
 
= Documents =
−
 
 
Some documents written and/or used by the PMC:
 
Some documents written and/or used by the PMC:
  
Line 8: Line 7:
 
= 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 Tuesday at 11.00am EST'''.
  
 
= Meeting Minutes =
 
= Meeting Minutes =
−
'''Aug 25, 2010:''' - Dani, Martin
 
−
* Dani - 3.6.1 looks ok - no other topics
 
  
−
<hr/>
+
'''Mar 21, 2017''' - Dani, Martin, Alex
−
'''Aug 18, 2010:''' - Dani, John, Martin
+
* Dani: '''Dirk Fauth''' [https://dev.eclipse.org/mhonarc/lists/eclipse-pmc/msg02891.html Requests on eclipse-pmc]
−
* John - '''Eclipse 3.x and 4.0''' and the Release Train
+
** Alex agrees with Dani
−
** Early feedback from 4.0 adopters is that most stuff actually works when dropping in binaries (talking binary compatibility, not source compatibility)
+
** Where does the "0.x version before graduation" requirement come from? - Development Process, but maybe didn't apply to plugin versions
−
** Martin is concerned that dropping binaries built against 3.x into 4.0 will fail late at runtime only, due to use of internals
+
** Dani thinks that forcing a 0.x version causes forced breakage once something goes API thus doesn't make much sense
−
** John suggests API usage scan to understand issues early
+
* Dani: '''Szymon Ptasiewicz'''
−
** Martin is more interested in source compatibility (build against 4.0) - can this be made super simple?
+
  
−
<hr/>
+
'''Mar 14, 2017''' - Dani, Martin, Alex
−
'''Aug 11, 2010:''' - McQ, Martin, Dani
+
* Dani: '''Java 9 readiness''' - see [https://dev.eclipse.org/mhonarc/lists/cross-project-issues-dev cross-project-issues-dev]
−
* McQ - '''3.7 Planning Process''' - input requested from all committers about plan items
+
** Step 1: For testing, just download a Java 9 beta JVM, add the module -- all testing is possible from commandline
−
* '''Eclipse 4.0 Feedback''' - not too much seen, neither good nor bad
+
*** Platform team has an install, but Mike was concerned about legal issues - a bug is open to allow all simrel access
 +
** Step 2: Running the JDeps tools as per the [[Java 9 Readiness]] wiki can show violations
 +
*** Can even run with Java 8, Dani ran it on simrel, it's looking mostly good, only Orbit shows violations
 +
*** Platform team has some scripts; for Hudson there's even a Mojo, but it aborts when it finds a violation.
 +
** Step 3: Reflection - Will only figure out when knowing the code or testing
 +
** All these 3 tests can be done without the Java 9 patch in PDE. Only for debugging, one needs to self-host.
 +
*** This can be done either with Ed's Oomph support, or via the Marketplace
 +
** Platform team is still negotiating options for better support with Oracle
 +
* Dani: '''JUnit 5''' considers cutting down features for aligning with Oxygen
 +
** Decision to align, contributing support to Oxygen Update 1 in September
 +
* Dani: '''2 Platform Issues in M6'''
 +
** platform.ui reexports everything including jface - lower bundles not updated - JDT may fail if installed (fixed for M7)
 +
** major version uprev: interface not marked as @noimplement; reverting the version, people who loaded Friday's M6 would never get any updates any more; decision to stick to the version uprev, since the respective bundle is not used a lot
 +
*** In general, accidental major version uprev should be reverted because the error would stay around for long and might break existing binary bundles who can't be fixed any more
 +
*** In this case, it was OK to keep since the bundle isn't used much
 +
* Alex: '''Generic Editor and Testing'''
 +
** Looking very good already - only 1/3 of the code needed for getting the same feature set as with existing methods for creating editors
 +
** Looking for features to add missing documentation (workflows, use-cases like converting existing editors): End goal is to provide everything that the JDT Editor is providing
 +
** Dani: Likes replacement of pages on multipage editors, and some new editors; would not consider replacing the JDT editor
 +
** In the Platform.ISV docs bundle, there should be a section for "how to write your own editor"
  
 
<hr/>
 
<hr/>
−
'''Aug 4, 2010:''' - meeting cancelled
+
'''Mar 7, 2017''' - Dani, Martin, Alex, Sergey, Lars
 +
* Dani: '''4.6.3 Updates''' - Looking good, Equinox bugs moved out by Tom
 +
* Dani: '''4.7M7 Update''' - Infrastructure issues but testing looks OK (except Mac which is not built yet)
 +
* Dani: '''Java 9 / Planning Council Update''' - Postponing Oxygen was discussed but denied; late July update being considered
 +
** See the [https://dev.eclipse.org/mhonarc/lists/eclipse.org-planning-council/ eclipse.org-planning-council archives]
 +
* Lars: '''Platform.Resources Leadership''' after Sergey Leaving
 +
** Dani pinged Szymon, will continue discussion when we hear back; merging with platform.ui is one option
 +
** Sergey: The "Team" and "Resources/Filesystem" parts could be considered separately. Consider merging Team into UI.
 +
** Alex: One top Platform Project would make sense now...
 +
** Dani: reconsider when McQ is back. In the past, SWT was seen as separate.
 +
** Dani: Releng needs to be separate and protected because Releng committers can also change Hudson jobs, shut down servers etc where no history is kept
  
 
<hr/>
 
<hr/>
−
'''Jul 28, 2010:''' - McQ, John, Martin, Dani, Jeff
+
'''Feb 28, 2017''' - Sergey, Alex, Martin, McQ
−
* Discussed process for handling security patches
+
* Alex: '''Short update on Neon.3'''
−
** If patches had metadata that would allow them to be flagged as security or "critical" patches, then p2 could automatically apply them on startup
+
** 2 jdt.core bugs asking for PMC approval - regressions compared to Neon.2, approved
−
** Deluxe solution would use out of process installer to be able to repair corrupt install that can't even start
+
** PPC rebuild is in, so looking good
−
** Simple solution is to put patches in the eclipse/updates/3.6 repository and users need to apply them manually
+
* Sergey will leave Eclipse work after end of March
−
* 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]).
+
* Martin: '''RCPTT / Reddeer / Testing'''
−
* Discussed possibility of facet work moving to e4
+
** Reddeer: No tests that check Platform only - everything is on higher level today (WTP, server connectors etc)
−
** Need to be clear on what would be required to migrate it to the platform
+
** Runs on Neon.2 right now inside RH - the infrastructure isn't built for consuming daily builds
−
** Have separate call with Konstantin to discuss
+
** Would take some effort reducing to Platform only - no time for this in the RH team at the moment
−
* Discussed state of builds moving to Foundation infrastructure
+
** '''AI Martin''' will look at integrating RCPTT as time permits; would like {{bug|505826}} resolved ideally
−
** Could explore migrating build to different build technology such as Buckminster or Tycho if it provides any benefit
+
* McQ will be out next 2 weeks
−
** 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
+
'''Feb 21, 2017''' - Dani, Alex, Martin, Lars, Sergey
−
* McQ - '''State of Eclipse 4.0'''
+
* Lars: {{Bug|512273}} Allow any committer to retrigger Gerrit validation, and {{Bug|512319}} allow rebase
−
** Not where we'd like us to be, but converging fast and there seem no issues blocking shipping
+
** '''Agreement''' to allow retrigger for anyone, but rebase should be done by committers working on a contribution
−
** Not slowing down people any more, and get some new capabilities (view tear-off etc)
+
** Dani: Not clear where to retrigger (Sergey: it's discoverable once permission is there)
−
** Should we have 3.7 and 4.1 release trains? allow projects to choose? - Discussions ongoing with PC, Foundation (enough resources to support this?)
+
** '''AI Lars''' follow up on the bug
−
* John - '''Eclipse 4.0 Release Review'''
+
* Martin: '''UI Testing'''
−
** Need to go public now to have 1-week review period
+
** [http://eclipse.org/rcptt RCPTT] is completely Open Source; commercial server could be used for load balancing tests but this is not necessary
−
* Dani - need to start publishing the '''3.6.1 freeze plan'''
+
** Alex: Interested in Reddeer for upstreaming tests that already exist at RH; good reports about stability and scalability at RH
−
* Dani - '''separate groups for resources and runtime'''
+
** When we decide which way we go, we need a plan who's doing the work (create the tests). Maintenance would depend on their structure.
−
** Too small micro-components make operation harder
+
** Some Reddeer tests already upstreamed with WTP and Linuxtools
−
** McQ 0, Martin 0, Dani +1, John +1 (but strive for more simplicity on other areas)
+
** Lars: Where would the tests live? - In a common project accessible to all, or with the component they test ?
−
* Vacations - McQ 2 weeks off starting Aug 16
+
*** Lars, Dani: Since these are functional end-to-end, should live in their own repository, accessible by all committers.
 +
** '''AI Martin''' follow-up with Jubula. Try RCPTT on Windows and Linux. Give feedback till next week.
 +
** '''AI Alex''' share list of Reddeer tests existing at RH
 +
** '''AI Lars''' play with the Reddeer API
 +
* Dani: '''Update on PPC''' drop 32-bit, build 64-bit both le and be on RH VMs {{bug|512224}}
 +
** Alex: ppc64 currently built on Fedora 25; could build on REL7 if foundation requests a machine from RH Brno Farm '''AI Alex and Dani''' ask Denis
 +
* Dani: '''Neon.3 RC3''' please keep an eye on builds
 +
* Dani: Away this Friday afternoon and whole next week
  
 
<hr/>
 
<hr/>
−
'''Jul 14, 2010:''' - McQ, Martin, Dani
+
'''Feb 15, 2017'''
−
* Dani - '''Problem launching Oracle/Sun jre6u21 on Windows'''
+
−
** {{bug|319514}} Quickly runs out of Permgen space, because the vendor name has changed and so the -XXPermGen flag is not appended
+
−
** 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
+
−
*** Very natural that failure can happen when we don't control the VMs and the VM has custom arguments
+
−
** Only a windows issue for now (Linux parses version and looks for "hotspot")
+
−
** Martin: Placing a .hotspotrc file somewhere is another possible workaround
+
−
** Dani and Martin propose updating the FAQ, adding a Readme section, circulating the information about workarounds should be sufficient.
+
  
 
<hr/>
 
<hr/>
−
'''Jul 7, 2010:''' - McQ, Jeff, Martin, John, Dani
+
'''Feb 8, 2017''' - Dani, Alex, Martin, Lars
−
* McQ - '''Graduating e4 without changing the name'''
+
* Dani: '''{{bug|509412}}''' - Adopt newer JSch for Platform 4.6.3
−
** 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
+
** Alex is fully consumed with Webkit work for Oxygen
−
** eg messages about the state of Performance, BIDI, ... cf Eclipse 4.0 "Early Adopter Release"
+
** Need to move target platform to the latest Orbit in order to pick up the new JSch; that might cause other changes, since Orbit retention policy keeps only one version
−
* Dani - '''BREE to 1.5 for JDT-UI''', what is the process?
+
** Dani: Cherry-pick the new JSch recipe to the Orbit Maintenance Branch ?
−
** '''approved''', all in favor, eat our own dogfood, 1.6 does not provide much benefit
+
** Martin: Looks like in the past, new Orbit R-Builds were made for Maintenance ... but with the move of Orbit to git, it is unclear how branch builds for Neon.x would be made
−
* Dani - '''Checkin Policies for 3.6.1 Maintenance Stream'''
+
* Dani: '''Update on RT PMC (Equinox) coming to Platform'''
−
** We should have more control over what goes into M-builds .. what's the least intrusive way doing so?
+
** Tom Watson is in favor, reached out to Wayne for process
−
** McQ suggests M7-ish policies + endgame . Dani suggests mandatory 1-committer code review. Martin requires fix verification.
+
** Potentially move entire IP log, but IP team is currently busy with CQs for Oxygen
−
** Bring up the topic on Arch call, since committers are affected .. the goal is keeping quality high and having change control.
+
* Dani: '''Finally Unblocked on Java Language Server'''
 +
** Dirk from Microsoft signed the committer agreement
 +
* Dani: '''Scenarios for UI Testing'''
 +
** Initial Scenario from the PMC Notes can already be used; once that works, could extend to more
 +
* Dani: '''Sign Up for Security Rep'''
 +
** See [https://dev.eclipse.org/mhonarc/lists/tools-pmc/msg03927.html Wayne's message to PMCs] requesting PMC attendance
 +
** John Arthorne used to be the Security Rep;
 +
** Tasks: Follow the security mailing list; currently low volume but might get higher with IoT getting up speed
 +
** '''RESOLUTION: Alex agrees to sign up''' since already following security issues
 +
* Dani+Alex: '''libswt-gtk3 natives for PPC'''
 +
** Alex: Trying to limit the list of supported GTK versions to maximum 2; now at the latest GTK2 version
 +
** Currently, only Intel builds do both GTK2 and GTK3; PowerPC only does GTK2; the current hardware is unable to install REL7
 +
** Would prefer building at the Foundation over using custom company hardware; cost of hardware is around 50K
 +
** Primary Platforms should be built at the Foundation, secondary builds can be contributed ... should Linux-PPC be considered primary ?
 +
** Alex could easily provide a Fedora Platform, but it would be much newer than anything else that's around; ARM32 and ARM64 builds are already provided by Fedora
 +
** If somebody (IBM) needs an older version like CentOS, it would need to be provided by such adopters
 +
** '''AI Dani+McQ''' find out on priority of Linux-PPC (32bit, 64bit)
 +
* Alex: '''Update on Reddeer Testing Framework'''
 +
** A new version is being written, that no longer uses SWTBot underneath; there's a plan making this an Eclipse project
 +
** Engineers claim that after the rewrite it's a lot more stable recognizing widgets than on top of SWTBot
 +
** Martin has been looking at [http://eclipsesource.com/blogs/tutorials/rcp-testing-tool-rcptt-basic-tutorial/ RCPTT] which looks promising initially (easy to record tests) but unclear how stable such tests would be.
 +
** (call had to be closed at this point)
  
 
<hr/>
 
<hr/>
−
'''Jun 30, 2010:''' - McQ, Dani, John
+
<strike>Feb 1, 2017 - cancelled</strike>
−
* No negative response yet about switching to Java 6 reference platforms
+
−
** Components free to move up but not a free-for-all. Justify reasons for moving up on eclipse-pmc mailing list.
+
−
** In many cases there is little added benefit of Java 6 so Java 5 is more likely as a bundle execution environment
+
−
* 4.0 release and bundle/package naming
+
−
** 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
 
−
* No topics
 
  
−
<hr/>
+
'''Jan 24, 2017''' - Dani, Lars, Martin, Alex
−
'''Jun 16, 2010:''' - McQ, Martin, Dani, Jeff
+
* Dani: '''New Jetty Version''' - Alex will look at it after FOSDEM (Feb 7)
−
* McQ - '''Java 4 going away''' (was EOL since October 2008, Java 5 EOL since October 2009)
+
* Dani: '''javax.xml''' - Plan to announce removal from the feature on cross-project for M6
−
** Dani: Don't bump up any BREBump up to 1.5 only if needed
+
** Cannot remove from the compile prerequisites, because plugins still on Java 5 need it
−
** Jeff: If moving off 1.4, why not move up to 1.6 ?
+
* Alex: '''[http://jboss-reddeer.github.io/reddeer/ Reddeer Testing Framework]'''
−
*** Reality is that we want the tiny Foundatation-1.1 or the big wad, and 1.5 is no better than 1.6
+
** JBoss Tools uses Reddeer for overall user story validation
−
*** Equinox may start using Generics and down-compile to 1.4 ... think about what's in ercp
+
** Lars: Why wasn't the framework added to SWTBot? -
−
** Start a cross-project discussion... question is whether everyone who depends on Platform has 1.6 VM Support
+
*** Reddeer is not a framework, it's meant as a test harness library - smaller scope than SWTBot or Jubula
−
** Martin has no problem with 1.6, suggest asking on cross-project / some of the bigger players (e.g. Jetty, Modeling, ...)
+
*** API Stability across multiple Eclipse versions is out of scope, thus created outside Eclipse for now
−
*** McQ to ask Boris bring up with the Board
+
** Martin: Any improvements in object recognition compared to plain SWTBot?
−
* Martin, Jeff, Dani vacation next 2 weeks (likely not on the call).
+
*** Reddeer tries to make use of the best mechanisms from SWTBot for object recognition (Finder, or callbots). That saves users from making newbie mistakes in SWTBot, but apart from that it's no better
 +
*** No solution for external (non-Eclipse) dialogs ... that's not doable in SWT
 +
** Lars: EclipseSource people have been talking about [http://eclipsesource.com/blogs/tutorials/rcp-testing-tool-rcptt-basic-tutorial/ RCPTT], it might be able to deal with native tooltips etc
 +
** Dani and Lars think Jubula is too heaviweight; might work for Integration Builds, but not for individual developer's builds. Local setup must be really easy. Also, setup looks non-trivial, needs resources to work on ... and, doesn't seem to add much benefit over SWTBot (assuming that Jubula agent doesn't hook into native libs like win32, Cocoa or GTK).
 +
*** Alex: Especially integration in Maven may be hard.
 +
** Alex: Main limitation is that we don't have resources to actually create tests. Suggest reaching out for help asking people who would actually create tests ... then use whatever framework that people would like to use.
 +
** Dani and Lars won't be able to come up with a workflow scenario before end of next week --&gt; Alex will come up with an idea since he has meetings on Monday.
 +
*** Dani: Launch Eclipse, choose a workspace, open the package explorer, create a Java project (helloworld). Expand later, maybe into quick assist.
 +
*** '''AI Alex''' to demo Reddeer in 2 weeks
 +
*** '''AI Martin''' to try installing Jubula until next week
 +
*** '''AI Martin''' ping Sergey re: asking for help on Platform/Resources.
  
−
<hr/>
+
<hr>
−
'''Jun 9, 2010:''' - Martin, Dani, McQ, John
+
'''Jan 17, 2017''' - Dani, Sergey, Alex, Lars, Martin, McQ
−
* Dani - '''Approval for Docs''' - flexibility around docs is good, but after RC4 is too late.
+
* Sergey: '''Merging platform.resources with platform.ui'''
−
* Dani - '''Re-Opening HEAD''' - basically OK, to be discussed at the Arch call.
+
** Seems that more contributions to platform.resources are made by platform.ui committers, than others. Only 2 platform.resources committers seem active (and those two are actually platform.ui committers as well)
−
* McQ - '''Shutting down status messages''' for rest of the month except for really noteworthy things.
+
*** Opening up to Platform UI would encourage more people to actually contribute to resources. Strive for shared access on components that are interrelated
−
 
+
** Dani: Merging into platform.ui would mean making Dani and Lars the leaders for signoff - that causes too much burden
−
<hr/>
+
** Sergey: Platform/Team has actually more synergy with Platform/UI than resources
−
'''Jun 2, 2010:''' - Martin, Dani, McQ, John, McQ
+
** Alex: For gcc for example, there is a notion of "maintainers" per git repo for signoffs - that's independent of leadership or commit rights
−
* Dani - '''ECF Issues''': Why does Eclipse have a process with Approvals while ECF does not. At the moment, there is a mutual dependency.
+
*** McQ: Not sure how adding another role would simplify things ?
−
** Once we decided to consume them, we have no control over their rules.
+
** Sergey: The problem for signoffs is not is much the volume of commits, but the volume of failing tests
−
** Our only option is not consuming late changes from them (and thus burn the community and them).
+
** Alex: The manpower of Platform Resources is so low by now that even {{bug|509412}} was not being filed ... existing committers do not really seem to "own" the project any more, this is an indication for merging
−
** John - there are some cases where we could push back a bit more (without going to the limit of not consuming at all).
+
** Martin: Can't see how merging into a bigger entity would resolve the "ownership" problem. Perhaps make interested contributors Platform/Resources committers instead, and see how to resolve the ownership issue on the smaller scope ?
−
** 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: Propose applying the recent simplification of gaining commit rights (for "known" committers)
−
** 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.
+
* Lars: '''Removing javax.xml'''
−
* John - '''Builds after RC4'''
+
** Was introduced only for very old JRE's , it is part of the JRE now
−
** Need PMC agreement. John going to discuss cross-project criteria.
+
** Martin: Might cause a uses constraint issue since not exporting the package with version any more, see http://njbartlett.name/2011/09/02/uses-constraints.html
−
** 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.'''
+
** Lars: With javax.annotation, that was solved with smart reexporting
−
** 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.
+
** McQ: OK with removal when we can confirm we're not breaking things
−
* John - '''When to start 3.7 and 3.6.1 builds''' - defer to next week.
+
** Dani: Whoever requested removal should double-check whether the API is the same.
−
 
+
**'''AI Lars''' send a note to Tom Watson as the submitter.
−
<hr/>
+
* Dani: '''Project Updates'''
−
'''May 26, 2010:''' - Dani, McQ, Martin, Jeff, John
+
** Deadlines upcoming for CQs and APIs - see Endgame Plan, please provide feedback
−
* Brief meeting. John just mentions that there's surprisingly many "Critical" bugs. Maybe just a triage problem. Will bring up in Arch call.
+
* McQ: '''UI Testing and Jubula'''
−
 
+
−
<hr/>
+
−
'''May 19, 2010:''' - Dani, McQ, Martin, Jeff, John
+
−
* John - {{bug|27930}} '''Naming of Eclipse Classic'''
+
−
** McQ - No other package on that page is the output of a single project, would want to see Eclipse SDK removed from packages page
+
−
** Jeff - "RCP/Plugin Developer" used to be direct replacements (SDK + Mylyn + XML Editor), but now also includes RAP (217MB)
+
−
** Dani - Some people go to downloads/ and then look for a milestone
+
−
** "Development Builds" tab provides access to milestones of packages; "Projects" tab provides access to direct project output.
+
−
** '''Resolution:''' 650.000 people have downloaded classic (#2 download), even scrolling down - changing this is a waste.
+
−
* 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)
+
−
** 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
+
−
** '''Resolution:''' pmc+ since little effort avoids lot of churn. Keeping the functionality without allowing to disable is a no-go.
+
−
* Martin - '''Feedback channel for removing API''' process (e.g. {{bug|311931}})
+
−
** '''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/>
+
−
'''May 12, 2010:''' - McQ, Martin, John, Jeff, Dani
+
−
* Remaining work for Release - John: Checklist (Docs, collective N&N etc... IP Logs end May)
+
−
** [[Eclipse/Release checklist]], and [[Eclipse Doc Checklist]]. '''AI Dani''' has another one for Docs - will update for 3.6 and send offline
+
−
** [[Platform-releng-faq#Eclipse_Release_checklist]] also links to [[3.3 Release checklist]]
+
−
* 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
+
−
* Eclipse SDK 4.0 Naming
+
−
** John - from Mailing List discussion, "Eclipse SDK 4.0 Early Adopter Release" seemed to be the favorite one
+
−
** 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
+
−
* API Deletion - luceneSearchParticipant
+
−
** Deprecation should include a migration path (if it exists).
+
−
** Will document deletions in the migration guide (and probably also in the README)
+
−
** Martin: Add a Bugzilla Keyword for API Deletions, will make it very easy to create a query for all pending API deletions
+
−
** Jeff: Whatever we do, current deletions should be examplary.
+
−
 
+
−
<hr/>
+
−
'''May 5, 2010:''' - McQ, Martin, John, Dani
+
−
* Martin - {{bug|309059}} root cert validity? - Tom investigating, no new info
+
−
* Martin - How to mark issues for [[Polish3.6]] (UNC issues, Launcher vmargs {{bug|149994}}) - who sets the Bugzilla polish kwd?
+
−
** 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/>
+
−
'''Apr 28, 2010:''' - Jeff, Martin, John, McQ, Dani
+
−
* 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]
+
−
** 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)
+
−
** Consensus: ''No concerted effort'', there are likely other more pressing issues; but ''investigate and prioritize what we find, and fix if possible''.
+
−
** <b><i>Running on UNC is considered a Polish item</i></b>.
+
−
* 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/>
+
−
'''Apr 21, 2010:''' - Jeff, Martin, John, Dani, McQ
+
−
* John - extended '''2 day test pass''' for M7 on Mon and Tue
+
−
* Jeff - '''Eclipse 4.0 naming'''
+
−
** 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
+
−
** 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/>
+
−
'''Apr 14, 2010:''' - John, Dani, Martin, Jeff
+
−
* 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)
+
−
** 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.
+
−
** 28 sec in 3.5.2 but 36 sec in 3.6m6. Will file a bug tomorrow.
+
−
** 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.
+
−
** Jeff: Try have a look at {{Bug|308157}} Jarfile cache now limited to 100. Reason might just be cycling through more Jar's.
+
−
* John, Dani - '''Polish List'''
+
−
* John - '''e4 plan update'''. Waiting on McQ, wants an accurate list on what's graduating.
+
−
** Jeff - once something is in 4.0 you cannot remove in 4.x so better think twice before graduating.
+
−
** 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.
+
−
** 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.
+
−
** John - '''Self-hosting a day on Eclipse 4.0 without blocking issues!''' (But much to be polished, bugs, errors in the log etc).
+
−
* 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".
+
−
** Developer docs as part of the tooling is wrong ... should be associated with targets instead.
+
−
** John: p2 does have the ability to install into multiple profiles (plan = multiple profiles)... might be (mis)used for this, is it a hack?
+
−
** Jeff: Much target provisioning was deferred off 3.6
+
−
 
+
−
<hr/>
+
−
'''Apr 7, 2010:''' - McQ, Dani, Martin, Jeff, John
+
−
* Builds - short call
+
−
 
+
−
<hr/>
+
−
'''Mar 31, 2010:''' - McQ, Dani, Martin, John
+
−
* Martin - '''EclipseCon Report'''
+
−
** 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...)
+
−
** e4 message in general very well positioned and received; git / egit was another hot topic
+
−
** 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
+
−
** 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/>
+
−
'''Mar 17, 2010:''' - McQ, Dani, Martin
+
−
* McQ: '''git''' vs CVS: Should there be contributions by Platform on Egit?
+
−
** 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.
+
−
* 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.
+
−
** McQ unsure whether this is worthwile, since all industry trends go towards more web integration. '''AI Martin''' follow up with Grant
+
−
* Dani: '''Performance and Polish''' passes
+
−
** All teams need to fix the issues that Frederic finds. M7 is the performance and polish pass. Prioritize items.
+
−
* Dani: '''Freeze Plan'''
+
−
** Suggest a 2-day test pass (mon/tue) before the RC's, ie move 1 day from RC2 into M7
+
−
 
+
−
<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.
+
−
** 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/>
+
−
'''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.
+
−
** Dani: Might be more than a packaging issue, somebody would have to invest
+
−
** McQ: Should fix the Performance issue at any rate, regardless of other issues.
+
−
* John sick, Dani vacation next week.
+
−
 
+
−
<hr/>
+
−
'''Feb 24, 2010:''' - 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
+
−
 
+
−
<hr/>
+
−
'''Feb 17, 2010:''' - Martin, Dani, John
+
−
* Martin: {{bug|196337}} Pushing CDT Spawner into the Platform?
+
−
** John, Dani: Platform could only accept it when there is use for it in the SDK. Otherwise it would just bloat the Platform
+
−
** 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
+
−
** 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.
+
−
* Martin: {{bug|301563}} Fast project import from snapshot data - UI or not?
+
−
** John: Want some UI in the Platform in order to test it more easily, e.g. an export wizard
+
−
* John: Webkit
+
−
** Foundation is considering allowing LGPL for exempt prereqs, but not for works-with .. missing a policy for dealing with LGPL works-with
+
−
** 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.
+
−
** 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)
+
−
** 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.
+
−
** PMC agreed to reclassify these libraries as exempt pre-req.
+
−
 
+
−
<hr/>
+
−
'''Feb 10, 2010:''' - John, Dani, McQ
+
−
* We agreed to list WebKitGTK and libsoup 2.4 as works-with prerequisites
+
−
* 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/>
+
−
'''Feb 03, 2010:''' -  Dani, Martin
+
−
* Dani: {{Bug|301563}} -  Fast project import from snapshot data
+
−
** 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)
+
−
** 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.
+
−
** Dani proposed checkin into a branch for easier merge / review - Martin: Will start working with patches
+
−
** AI Martin: Contact Sharon regarding IP review (reserve a slot)
+
−
 
+
−
<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
+
−
 
+
−
<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"
+
−
 
+
−
<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
+
  
 
<hr/>
 
<hr/>
−
'''Jan 6, 2010:''' - John, Dani, McQ, Jeff
+
'''Jan 10, 2017''' - Dani, Lars, Martin, Alex, Sergey, McQ - Special Guest: Alex Schladebeck
−
* Agreed on 3.5.2 [http://www.eclipse.org/eclipse/development/plans/freeze_plan_3_5_2.php freeze plan]
+
* Dani: '''Platform Bits on Maven Central''' - Now available thanks to Stephan Herrmann
−
** Note RC2 is a week earlier to avoid colliding with Helios M5 week
+
* Dani: '''Board Committer Rep Elections''' opening
−
* Discussed Helios plan updates 2 {{bug|298200}}
+
* Dani: After David Williams' move, Wayne is looking for a Planning Council Chair; Fred Gurr has taken over Simrel Releng
−
** Update Java 7 plan item to indicate only working on publicly available bits. Some progress made on getting access to specs but going slowly.
+
* Dani: objenesis (Mockito / Easymock dependency) and Java9 - will wait for how upstream is planning to address issues
−
** Update reference JRE's to latest version of each JRE
+
* Lars: '''Equinox move to Platform''' - no updates - '''AI Dani''' talk to Tom again
−
* Jeff will be away for next six weeks (vacation)
+
* McQ / AlexS: '''Jubula'''
−
* McQ to contact Steve to see if he still wishes to remain on PMC
+
** In the past, with lots of full-time Platform committers, sniff tests just happened automatically giving great confidence. Now, with more part-time work happening, there is more need for end-to-end workflow test automation to give quality confidence
 +
** Martin: On top of low-level JUnit tests, want at least very few highlevel end-to-end test to avoid "Eclipse looking silly". Need UI tests that are really stable (avoid random failures)
 +
** Dani: On EGit SWTBot tests, too many libraries to install, how to run on Gerrit HIPP slaves
 +
** AlexS: Original Jubula goal was to allow non-programmers write tests. Beginning 2015, the client API (for controlling the SUT) was separated from the front-end, was separated from the ITE. This allows writing UI tests programmatically, and avoids the need for a database.
 +
*** For identifying components/actions to write tests, officially an object mapping needs to be done in the front-end (ITE, integrated test environment). But there may be a shortcut available for getting object IDs
 +
*** Compared to SWTBot, Jubula is 90% blackbox (code highlevel actions rather than things like calling setText())
 +
*** UI Tests typically take longer than unittests by definition (due to setup, teardown, ...), so might not be applicable for Gerrit triggers
 +
*** Dani: Would like to run a first test on CentOS first, as part of the integration tests
 +
*** Lars: Robustness of the tests? - SWT on Mac is problematic, but Linux and Windows should be OK.
 +
*** Martin: Dependencies? - Around 5MB Libs, plus the agent needs to be installed (around 100MB). Once that is there, tests are stand-alone on a laptop. There might also be an "embedded agent" but not sure ('''AI AlexS to check''')
 +
*** Getting a first test up and running ? - Maybe around 1 week, depends on what to do ?
 +
**** Lars: Would like something for quick access. Martin would something for "fresh download" (fresh config area + workspace) maybe combined with quick access.
 +
*** '''AI AlexS''' send slides
 +
*** '''AI Dani + Lars''' propose scenarios. Check possible owners of the initiative on Platform/UI side
 +
*** '''AI AlexS''' check possible PlatformUI Contributors from Jubula team to get started
  
 
= Archive =
 
= Archive =
 +
* [[Eclipse/PMC/Minutes 2016 | Archive of Meeting Minutes from 2016]]
 +
* [[Eclipse/PMC/Minutes 2015 | Archive of Meeting Minutes from 2015]]
 +
* [[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 12:10, 21 March 2017

Documents

Some documents written and/or used by the PMC:

Meeting Schedule

The Eclipse Project PMC has a weekly phone meeting every Tuesday at 11.00am EST.

Meeting Minutes

Mar 21, 2017 - Dani, Martin, Alex

  • Dani: Dirk Fauth Requests on eclipse-pmc
    • Alex agrees with Dani
    • Where does the "0.x version before graduation" requirement come from? - Development Process, but maybe didn't apply to plugin versions
    • Dani thinks that forcing a 0.x version causes forced breakage once something goes API thus doesn't make much sense
  • Dani: Szymon Ptasiewicz

Mar 14, 2017 - Dani, Martin, Alex

  • Dani: Java 9 readiness - see cross-project-issues-dev
    • Step 1: For testing, just download a Java 9 beta JVM, add the module -- all testing is possible from commandline
      • Platform team has an install, but Mike was concerned about legal issues - a bug is open to allow all simrel access
    • Step 2: Running the JDeps tools as per the Java 9 Readiness wiki can show violations
      • Can even run with Java 8, Dani ran it on simrel, it's looking mostly good, only Orbit shows violations
      • Platform team has some scripts; for Hudson there's even a Mojo, but it aborts when it finds a violation.
    • Step 3: Reflection - Will only figure out when knowing the code or testing
    • All these 3 tests can be done without the Java 9 patch in PDE. Only for debugging, one needs to self-host.
      • This can be done either with Ed's Oomph support, or via the Marketplace
    • Platform team is still negotiating options for better support with Oracle
  • Dani: JUnit 5 considers cutting down features for aligning with Oxygen
    • Decision to align, contributing support to Oxygen Update 1 in September
  • Dani: 2 Platform Issues in M6
    • platform.ui reexports everything including jface - lower bundles not updated - JDT may fail if installed (fixed for M7)
    • major version uprev: interface not marked as @noimplement; reverting the version, people who loaded Friday's M6 would never get any updates any more; decision to stick to the version uprev, since the respective bundle is not used a lot
      • In general, accidental major version uprev should be reverted because the error would stay around for long and might break existing binary bundles who can't be fixed any more
      • In this case, it was OK to keep since the bundle isn't used much
  • Alex: Generic Editor and Testing
    • Looking very good already - only 1/3 of the code needed for getting the same feature set as with existing methods for creating editors
    • Looking for features to add missing documentation (workflows, use-cases like converting existing editors): End goal is to provide everything that the JDT Editor is providing
    • Dani: Likes replacement of pages on multipage editors, and some new editors; would not consider replacing the JDT editor
    • In the Platform.ISV docs bundle, there should be a section for "how to write your own editor"

Mar 7, 2017 - Dani, Martin, Alex, Sergey, Lars

  • Dani: 4.6.3 Updates - Looking good, Equinox bugs moved out by Tom
  • Dani: 4.7M7 Update - Infrastructure issues but testing looks OK (except Mac which is not built yet)
  • Dani: Java 9 / Planning Council Update - Postponing Oxygen was discussed but denied; late July update being considered
  • Lars: Platform.Resources Leadership after Sergey Leaving
    • Dani pinged Szymon, will continue discussion when we hear back; merging with platform.ui is one option
    • Sergey: The "Team" and "Resources/Filesystem" parts could be considered separately. Consider merging Team into UI.
    • Alex: One top Platform Project would make sense now...
    • Dani: reconsider when McQ is back. In the past, SWT was seen as separate.
    • Dani: Releng needs to be separate and protected because Releng committers can also change Hudson jobs, shut down servers etc where no history is kept

Feb 28, 2017 - Sergey, Alex, Martin, McQ

  • Alex: Short update on Neon.3
    • 2 jdt.core bugs asking for PMC approval - regressions compared to Neon.2, approved
    • PPC rebuild is in, so looking good
  • Sergey will leave Eclipse work after end of March
  • Martin: RCPTT / Reddeer / Testing
    • Reddeer: No tests that check Platform only - everything is on higher level today (WTP, server connectors etc)
    • Runs on Neon.2 right now inside RH - the infrastructure isn't built for consuming daily builds
    • Would take some effort reducing to Platform only - no time for this in the RH team at the moment
    • AI Martin will look at integrating RCPTT as time permits; would like bug 505826 resolved ideally
  • McQ will be out next 2 weeks

Feb 21, 2017 - Dani, Alex, Martin, Lars, Sergey

  • Lars: bug 512273 Allow any committer to retrigger Gerrit validation, and bug 512319 allow rebase
    • Agreement to allow retrigger for anyone, but rebase should be done by committers working on a contribution
    • Dani: Not clear where to retrigger (Sergey: it's discoverable once permission is there)
    • AI Lars follow up on the bug
  • Martin: UI Testing
    • RCPTT is completely Open Source; commercial server could be used for load balancing tests but this is not necessary
    • Alex: Interested in Reddeer for upstreaming tests that already exist at RH; good reports about stability and scalability at RH
    • When we decide which way we go, we need a plan who's doing the work (create the tests). Maintenance would depend on their structure.
    • Some Reddeer tests already upstreamed with WTP and Linuxtools
    • Lars: Where would the tests live? - In a common project accessible to all, or with the component they test ?
      • Lars, Dani: Since these are functional end-to-end, should live in their own repository, accessible by all committers.
    • AI Martin follow-up with Jubula. Try RCPTT on Windows and Linux. Give feedback till next week.
    • AI Alex share list of Reddeer tests existing at RH
    • AI Lars play with the Reddeer API
  • Dani: Update on PPC drop 32-bit, build 64-bit both le and be on RH VMs bug 512224
    • Alex: ppc64 currently built on Fedora 25; could build on REL7 if foundation requests a machine from RH Brno Farm AI Alex and Dani ask Denis
  • Dani: Neon.3 RC3 please keep an eye on builds
  • Dani: Away this Friday afternoon and whole next week

Feb 15, 2017

Feb 8, 2017 - Dani, Alex, Martin, Lars

  • Dani: bug 509412 - Adopt newer JSch for Platform 4.6.3
    • Alex is fully consumed with Webkit work for Oxygen
    • Need to move target platform to the latest Orbit in order to pick up the new JSch; that might cause other changes, since Orbit retention policy keeps only one version
    • Dani: Cherry-pick the new JSch recipe to the Orbit Maintenance Branch ?
    • Martin: Looks like in the past, new Orbit R-Builds were made for Maintenance ... but with the move of Orbit to git, it is unclear how branch builds for Neon.x would be made
  • Dani: Update on RT PMC (Equinox) coming to Platform
    • Tom Watson is in favor, reached out to Wayne for process
    • Potentially move entire IP log, but IP team is currently busy with CQs for Oxygen
  • Dani: Finally Unblocked on Java Language Server
    • Dirk from Microsoft signed the committer agreement
  • Dani: Scenarios for UI Testing
    • Initial Scenario from the PMC Notes can already be used; once that works, could extend to more
  • Dani: Sign Up for Security Rep
    • See Wayne's message to PMCs requesting PMC attendance
    • John Arthorne used to be the Security Rep;
    • Tasks: Follow the security mailing list; currently low volume but might get higher with IoT getting up speed
    • RESOLUTION: Alex agrees to sign up since already following security issues
  • Dani+Alex: libswt-gtk3 natives for PPC
    • Alex: Trying to limit the list of supported GTK versions to maximum 2; now at the latest GTK2 version
    • Currently, only Intel builds do both GTK2 and GTK3; PowerPC only does GTK2; the current hardware is unable to install REL7
    • Would prefer building at the Foundation over using custom company hardware; cost of hardware is around 50K
    • Primary Platforms should be built at the Foundation, secondary builds can be contributed ... should Linux-PPC be considered primary ?
    • Alex could easily provide a Fedora Platform, but it would be much newer than anything else that's around; ARM32 and ARM64 builds are already provided by Fedora
    • If somebody (IBM) needs an older version like CentOS, it would need to be provided by such adopters
    • AI Dani+McQ find out on priority of Linux-PPC (32bit, 64bit)
  • Alex: Update on Reddeer Testing Framework
    • A new version is being written, that no longer uses SWTBot underneath; there's a plan making this an Eclipse project
    • Engineers claim that after the rewrite it's a lot more stable recognizing widgets than on top of SWTBot
    • Martin has been looking at RCPTT which looks promising initially (easy to record tests) but unclear how stable such tests would be.
    • (call had to be closed at this point)

Feb 1, 2017 - cancelled

Jan 24, 2017 - Dani, Lars, Martin, Alex

  • Dani: New Jetty Version - Alex will look at it after FOSDEM (Feb 7)
  • Dani: javax.xml - Plan to announce removal from the feature on cross-project for M6
    • Cannot remove from the compile prerequisites, because plugins still on Java 5 need it
  • Alex: Reddeer Testing Framework
    • JBoss Tools uses Reddeer for overall user story validation
    • Lars: Why wasn't the framework added to SWTBot? -
      • Reddeer is not a framework, it's meant as a test harness library - smaller scope than SWTBot or Jubula
      • API Stability across multiple Eclipse versions is out of scope, thus created outside Eclipse for now
    • Martin: Any improvements in object recognition compared to plain SWTBot?
      • Reddeer tries to make use of the best mechanisms from SWTBot for object recognition (Finder, or callbots). That saves users from making newbie mistakes in SWTBot, but apart from that it's no better
      • No solution for external (non-Eclipse) dialogs ... that's not doable in SWT
    • Lars: EclipseSource people have been talking about RCPTT, it might be able to deal with native tooltips etc
    • Dani and Lars think Jubula is too heaviweight; might work for Integration Builds, but not for individual developer's builds. Local setup must be really easy. Also, setup looks non-trivial, needs resources to work on ... and, doesn't seem to add much benefit over SWTBot (assuming that Jubula agent doesn't hook into native libs like win32, Cocoa or GTK).
      • Alex: Especially integration in Maven may be hard.
    • Alex: Main limitation is that we don't have resources to actually create tests. Suggest reaching out for help asking people who would actually create tests ... then use whatever framework that people would like to use.
    • Dani and Lars won't be able to come up with a workflow scenario before end of next week --> Alex will come up with an idea since he has meetings on Monday.
      • Dani: Launch Eclipse, choose a workspace, open the package explorer, create a Java project (helloworld). Expand later, maybe into quick assist.
      • AI Alex to demo Reddeer in 2 weeks
      • AI Martin to try installing Jubula until next week
      • AI Martin ping Sergey re: asking for help on Platform/Resources.

Jan 17, 2017 - Dani, Sergey, Alex, Lars, Martin, McQ

  • Sergey: Merging platform.resources with platform.ui
    • Seems that more contributions to platform.resources are made by platform.ui committers, than others. Only 2 platform.resources committers seem active (and those two are actually platform.ui committers as well)
      • Opening up to Platform UI would encourage more people to actually contribute to resources. Strive for shared access on components that are interrelated
    • Dani: Merging into platform.ui would mean making Dani and Lars the leaders for signoff - that causes too much burden
    • Sergey: Platform/Team has actually more synergy with Platform/UI than resources
    • Alex: For gcc for example, there is a notion of "maintainers" per git repo for signoffs - that's independent of leadership or commit rights
      • McQ: Not sure how adding another role would simplify things ?
    • Sergey: The problem for signoffs is not is much the volume of commits, but the volume of failing tests
    • Alex: The manpower of Platform Resources is so low by now that even bug 509412 was not being filed ... existing committers do not really seem to "own" the project any more, this is an indication for merging
    • Martin: Can't see how merging into a bigger entity would resolve the "ownership" problem. Perhaps make interested contributors Platform/Resources committers instead, and see how to resolve the ownership issue on the smaller scope ?
    • McQ: Propose applying the recent simplification of gaining commit rights (for "known" committers)
  • Lars: Removing javax.xml
    • Was introduced only for very old JRE's , it is part of the JRE now
    • Martin: Might cause a uses constraint issue since not exporting the package with version any more, see http://njbartlett.name/2011/09/02/uses-constraints.html
    • Lars: With javax.annotation, that was solved with smart reexporting
    • McQ: OK with removal when we can confirm we're not breaking things
    • Dani: Whoever requested removal should double-check whether the API is the same.
    • AI Lars send a note to Tom Watson as the submitter.
  • Dani: Project Updates
    • Deadlines upcoming for CQs and APIs - see Endgame Plan, please provide feedback
  • McQ: UI Testing and Jubula

Jan 10, 2017 - Dani, Lars, Martin, Alex, Sergey, McQ - Special Guest: Alex Schladebeck

  • Dani: Platform Bits on Maven Central - Now available thanks to Stephan Herrmann
  • Dani: Board Committer Rep Elections opening
  • Dani: After David Williams' move, Wayne is looking for a Planning Council Chair; Fred Gurr has taken over Simrel Releng
  • Dani: objenesis (Mockito / Easymock dependency) and Java9 - will wait for how upstream is planning to address issues
  • Lars: Equinox move to Platform - no updates - AI Dani talk to Tom again
  • McQ / AlexS: Jubula
    • In the past, with lots of full-time Platform committers, sniff tests just happened automatically giving great confidence. Now, with more part-time work happening, there is more need for end-to-end workflow test automation to give quality confidence
    • Martin: On top of low-level JUnit tests, want at least very few highlevel end-to-end test to avoid "Eclipse looking silly". Need UI tests that are really stable (avoid random failures)
    • Dani: On EGit SWTBot tests, too many libraries to install, how to run on Gerrit HIPP slaves
    • AlexS: Original Jubula goal was to allow non-programmers write tests. Beginning 2015, the client API (for controlling the SUT) was separated from the front-end, was separated from the ITE. This allows writing UI tests programmatically, and avoids the need for a database.
      • For identifying components/actions to write tests, officially an object mapping needs to be done in the front-end (ITE, integrated test environment). But there may be a shortcut available for getting object IDs
      • Compared to SWTBot, Jubula is 90% blackbox (code highlevel actions rather than things like calling setText())
      • UI Tests typically take longer than unittests by definition (due to setup, teardown, ...), so might not be applicable for Gerrit triggers
      • Dani: Would like to run a first test on CentOS first, as part of the integration tests
      • Lars: Robustness of the tests? - SWT on Mac is problematic, but Linux and Windows should be OK.
      • Martin: Dependencies? - Around 5MB Libs, plus the agent needs to be installed (around 100MB). Once that is there, tests are stand-alone on a laptop. There might also be an "embedded agent" but not sure (AI AlexS to check)
      • Getting a first test up and running ? - Maybe around 1 week, depends on what to do ?
        • Lars: Would like something for quick access. Martin would something for "fresh download" (fresh config area + workspace) maybe combined with quick access.
      • AI AlexS send slides
      • AI Dani + Lars propose scenarios. Check possible owners of the initiative on Platform/UI side
      • AI AlexS check possible PlatformUI Contributors from Jubula team to get started

Archive

Retrieved from "https://wiki.eclipse.org/index.php?title=Eclipse/PMC&oldid=415255"

Back to the top