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.
Eclipse/PMC
Meeting Schedule
The Eclipse Project PMC has a weekly phone meeting every wednesday at 10.30am EST.
Meeting Minutes
Aug 5: - McQ, Dani, Martin, Jeff, John A
- Security proposal on eclipse-pmc list - agree that this should be closer to the target runtimes (wtp, ...)
- "Plugin" vs "Bundle" - Clarification: Proposal was only about PDE. Global replacement is out of reach.
- McQ thinks that Plugin is a Bundle that makes use of the Eclipse extension registry (plugin.xml) - Jeff disagrees wrt declarative services
- As a message to end users, does it help us if we talk about "plugins"?
- Is this an internal statement about tooling, or something we should do more globally?
- Real problem is, that people should perceive PDE as tooling for bundles: Make Eclipse more adoptable in the OSGi community
- "Bundle" and "Plugin" have been used interchangeably for about 5 years... but still, a more pervasive change would require lots of docs changes that may be very painful for consumers
- McQ wants a technical proposal what should be changed
- Perhaps provide a separate tooling for bundles (with property files replaced)? EPP Package for Bundle Developers? - But a choice is not a good thing...
- Jeff suggestion: Do PDE 3.6 that is "all bundles" plus add a compatibility bundle that gives you the word "plugin" back.
- McQ: Backward Compatibility - consuming new versions of Eclipse is still too hard. IBM makes it the highest priority that everything that ran on 3.5 also runs on 3.6 - including internals - or the new version may not be consumable!
- Do anything that may not be easily backwards compatible in the 4.0 stream rather than the 3.x stream.
- Jeff thinks this is going to be a hard sell because internals are made to be internal
- Jeff: API Tooling that allows people to discover use of internals, see also bug 261544
Jul 29: - McQ, Dani, Martin, John A, Jeff
- Dani will start to organize Eclipse/Galileo/Retrospective items
- Too many broken builds recently
- e4 shipping 0.9 this week
- PDE project proposal coming to explore Eclipse build technology
Jul 15: - McQ, Dani, Martin, John A, Jeff
- Dani: What to do with the Galileo Retrospective items? Which ones should become action items? E.g. Bugzilla Slowness?
- John: Next PC meeting is Aug 3, should have items for the PC ready by then
- Decision: PMC mailing list conversation, will review retrospective action in Jul 29 PMC meeting.
- McQ to send out a note to formalize John as the PC representation
- McQ wants status messages again for the arch call
Jun 24: - McQ, Dani
- Dani asked whether the PMC meeting notes are targeted for the public
- McQ: yes, they got announced on pmc mailing list
- no PMC call next week due to a holiday
Jun 17: - McQ, Dani, Jeff, John A, (Martin joined just as we were hanging up)
- Dani asked whether the PMC had internal discussion of new committer votes
- A: Generally the PMC member for the component gives +1, unless they feel the need to bring the discussion to the rest of the PMC
- Jeff mentioned that we should remind the teams to do retrospectives
Jun 10: - McQ, Martin, Dani, Steve, John A
- Welcome to Dani, John agrees to be here as a listening member for a while
- Sun Java 6u14 (May 25) broken for debugging because thread ID's are changed when garbage collector runs
- Clearly a Sun bug (also happens in jdb) but not yet confirmed by Sun
- Described in Readme, but readme will only be available when a rebuild occurs
- Dani will send out a note tomorrow when they know more about other platforms
Jun 3: - McQ, Martin, Steve, Jeff
- McQ - asking Dani M to join the Eclipse PMC to represent JDT. PMC agrees. McQ will send a note to Mike Milinkovich / EMO.
- McQ - asking John A to represent the Eclipse Project on Planning Council
- Jeff thinks that the PC rep should be a PMC member in order to have a strong bi-directional communication path.
- McQ proposes asking John to join the PMC calls for communication.
- Martin agrees provided that John is OK with this delegate role.
- Steve bug 277713 critical bug, probably more critical bugs to triage - defer to arch call
- Jeff Target Provisioning discussion
May 27: - McQ, Martin, Steve
- bug 277735 releng.tools copyright tool - Martin would like to see it released. Discuss in Arch call.
May 20: - McQ, Martin
- PC Lead: John A suggested to represent Eclipse
- Linux: New Launchers built, didn't start on Linux ... I-build was broken, want to know why
May 13: - McQ, Martin, Jeff, Steve, Philippe
- bug 273660 Common Navigator: Pipelining issues with JDT + CDT
May 6: - McQ, Martin, Jeff
- McQ PDE Feature Request
- New Target Platform came in late
- PMC agrees with trying to fix this, but want to see the final patch before +1
- McQ Testplan
- People going to test their own because test plan is too complex
- Jeff Splash Screen
Apr 29: - McQ, Martin, Steve
- Martin: Java6 ref platform - anything between 6u3 and 6u10 (exclusive) was broken, anything after 6u10 (inclusive) has license issues in thirdpartylicensereadme.txt.
- Suggestion: Dont update the plan document yet, but start running tests with 6u13 on Linux. AI McQ talk to Kim about this.
- AI Martin make a final attempt to get more info out of Sun.
- Steve: Solaris x86 - looks good but some problems with X server
- McQ: API Deprecation Policy bug 261544 - AI McQ synthesise some summary and comment on the bug
- M7: Testers found some interesting prolbems with launching Eclipse from Eclipse (depending on VM, BIDI chars in paths dont work)
Apr 22: - McQ, Martin, Steve, Philippe
- Steve: Solaris x86 - got a Browser running, looking good,
- Steve: Cocoa Sheets - new API - Dialogs associated with a Window: Dialog slides down from title bar
- Clients need to opt in through new API because they need to specify a dialog as being adequate for sheet support
- Martin: Maintenance builds post SR2
- experience in the past has shown only very few, surgically isolated patches so the problem is probably smaller than anticipated
- don't want anything produced to appear official -- anything that appears official MUST result in a test pass and this must be avoided
- it makes sense to talk about this in the context of "Release Train" and not only "Eclipse Platform" -- Martin filed bug 273262 against the AC
- Martin has some update on Sun Java 6 -- will update bug 261724
Apr 15: - McQ, Jeff, Martin, Steve
- McQ: Solaris x86 - OK if we get the machine up and running until Friday, too late for swapping reference platform otherways
- Polish List Polish3.5 - Some developers don't have time for polish items. For now, it's just a list such that we *know* what's coming up.
- Martin wondering why we need a separate wiki page, bugzilla query should be enough?
- Who owns the Polish list - Eclipse Project Committers. We capture items that we find "stupid" when using Eclipse ourselves.
- Maintenance builds after 3.4
- IBM will never consume any community builds: want the absolute minimum of required fixes
- If a fix shows up in any IBM product, then it is on a bug somewhere
- But fixes are never cumulative
- Martin thinks that a first step would be well-defined markup of such "released-to-product" fixes.
- Another next step is allowing Eclipse builds by the Community -- we can do anything that's not making Kim's life harder.
- How to proceed with communications: open bugs, bugzilla discussions.
Apr 1: - McQ, Jeff, Martin, Steve, Philippe
- McQ: Solaris x86 (recommend building since Sun helped at Eclipsecon), Perf results (not trustworthy on Windows?)
- Martin: M-builds beyond 3.4.2
- Two problems: (a) provide a build system that the community can use, and (b) provide a platform for accumulating fixes easily without risking version collisions etc
- The risk of (b) is high that as a result we'd have some low-quality sea of incompatible fixes. We better don't go with this.
- Other solution is allow to cherry-pick on source level - just provide a new target milestone in bugzilla, product builders cherry-pick patches they want to apply and do so locally.
- Two problems: (a) provide a build system that the community can use, and (b) provide a platform for accumulating fixes easily without risking version collisions etc
- Jeff: OSGi tooling; future plans around build
- We need to run builds ourselves (see also above) - e.g. equinox sdk feature is in some internal repository
- PDE build has stretched pretty far over time.. what to do with it
- Needs to be one of the main plan items for 3.6, but don't want to wait that long
- SAP perhaps to help out with staffing
- Boris to host the arch call since Steve, McQ, Philippe all cannot join
Mar 18: - McQ, Steve, Martin
- no arch next week due to EclipseCon
- McQ found a performance test that is 8000% slower
- teams are overwhelmed (but remind them to check performance tests)
- Martin reminded us about use of Parallel IP for Mature Projects and JSch-0.1.41
- need to identify uses on the download links (or also inside the downloads?)
- EMO has not developed the policy yet
- McQ: "Q: Should we just not use the mechanism?"
- Downstream consumers may need to test against new lib features early. Just for test and experimentation, not for consumption: want parallel IP in I-builds
- McQ: Milestones are a corner case -- some consumers use these in products!
- Parallel IP is a tool for projects who want it. A clear policy is one thing. Guidelines for projects to adopt it or not is another thing -- may depend on the number and kind of consumers.
- Result: Martin to Bring up that topic on the Architecture Council/Meetings/March 22 F2F EclipseCon 2009,
- Example issues: can't put it in for I-build and remove for Milestone S-build
Mar 11: - McQ, Steve, Jeff, Martin
- Martin - bug 227055 and late API additions
- McQ: after m6 is too late if it has any downstream impact (changing behavior, deleting things, ...). Plain API additions may slip a week.
- Steve: If new API has effect on performance and polish, may look more favorably.
- If going in after M6, it needs to go through the process (e-mail and public discussion on eclipse-pmc list).
- Strict API Tooling checks to be enabled next week
- McQ - state of M6; some late UI things to review
- Some low-risk polish Cocoa items for Eclipsecon (enablers)
- Still changes in p2 (after m6), but stabilizing
- Martin/Jeff - New Target Platform Page may require more tweaking - risk of breaking community workflows!
- E.g. adding a directory to the target platform; Jeff uses target platforms a lot, so he's likely more exposed than most of the Community... 10 to 15 locations with hundreds of bundles...
- Related to the bug 224145 p2 "extension location" problem which broke user workflows. Don't want to have such breakage again.
- Jeff - Status on Galileo Must do's - deferred to next week
- McQ - p2 OSGi OBR Repositories
- Jeff: OSGi wants to foster bundle store / bundle repositories, and specify a repository standard (long-standing RFE112 never been ratified)
- Similar to p2, but does have some potential issues
- Ideally, Equinox would be the reference impl of whatever standard comes up... but got a staffing problem, how to get the solution standardized that we need.
- Writing a p2 OBR repository adapter is not hard, but OBR repos won't be able to eat p2 metadata
- p2 doesn't care about XML format whereas OBR specifies the XML. p2 got more sophisticated API model. Jeff doesn't have access to the latest spec.
- Steve wants Eclipsecon demos to be done on Cocoa, will expedite any bugfixes (please do file them!). Jeff needs browser integration.
Mar 4: - McQ, Steve, Jeff, Philippe, Martin
- Upgrade 3.4 -> 3.5
- Will we be able to support this in p2?
- Nope, needed hooks already in previous release (ie. needed them in 3.4 to be used by 3.5)
- Problems include replacing the Eclipse .exe
- Is this an important use case? There is no band width to solve this problem in 3.5
- it's a good showcase for p2 technology
- idea: put in the low level hooks for 3.5.1 and use them next time (ie. 3.5 -> 3.6)
- Did Update Manager ever do this?
- Jeff: It does not
- Will we be able to support this in p2?
- Deprecating Mac carbon?
- Apple claims Cocoa is the future
- 3.5 will be the last version of Eclipse where Carbon is under active development
- But will maintain for 3.6 and 3.7
- Q: Has Apple officially deprecated carbon?
- No but they have down played it (ie. no 64-bit support for carbon)
- Should there be an official deprecation policy for platforms?
Feb 25: - McQ, Steve, Martin, Philippe
- AC "committers should know" mail
- Following external links McQ why not introduce some Javascript on the server that warns users automatically when they follow an external link?
- Components to projects flattening (not on our plate at the time)
- Steve Target milestones for Eclipse project
- BZ patches to be flagged when they contain API
- N-builds broken over the weekend (again) - 3 weekends in a row - no people currently who are willing to work during the weekend
- Hudson might help eventually, for now using e4 builds as the guinea pig
- UI Forms has no committers - opportunity for Community to become committer
- migrate off (using internal browser instead)
- no critical bugs, less than 125 interesting bugs
- long-term future is e4 with css/styling and declarative ui
- Performance: No news (not yet while closing down API)
- Philippe thinks that the performance milestone must be earlier since performance might touch on API. We're losing memory because rebasing
- McQ - this cycle we had a performance run in M2, this year we're in a better position than last year
Feb 18: - no meeting
Feb 11:
Feb 4:
Jan 28:
- Java 6
- move reference platform to Sun 6u11
- problem(?): Sun added 3 new items added that are licensed LGPL or GPL
-
Martin added comment to bug 261724 to identify this issue
- move reference platform to Sun 6u11
- ICU 4.0
- we will stay with 4.0
- Deprecation Policy
- still under discussion, bug 261544
- Use of internal provisional
- seems to be some consensus about *not* requiring this, bug 261874
- JDT co-leadership
- what is the process?
- Jeff: vote in community; then propose to the PMC
- Would like to get Dani Meghert involved.
- Philippe will check development process documents
- what is the process?
- Cocoa port
- Looking good
- Taking early access off and making it the "first" choice for Mac downloads
- Milestone progress / 3.4.2
- Need to discuss M5 in arch call (should have done this last week)
- Should always remind the team in the arch call of upcoming deadlines
- Performance issues that need API to fix have to happen by M6
- Teams should understand performance results (will be discussed in a couple of weeks)
- Re: Reference Platforms
- Java6 on Solaris
- Martin's company would like to support this
-
filed bug 262907 to discuss process and practices around reference platforms
- Java6 on Solaris
Jan 21:
- How should we track meeting minutes topic - Wiki
- Provisional API conventions - Jeff working on bug 261874 for discussion at the AC
- should there be a tag in the Javadoc (ie. "experimental")?
- Jeff wants to keep the concerns "conventions" vs "Javadoc" separate
- Jeff, "... Javadoc should not be generated for provisional ..."
- Martin disagrees, "... need feedback and discussion for new API ..."
- What is the role of the PMC lead?
- global view of components/processes
- organize architecture call, ensure we are on track
- spark conversations (ie. M5 is feature freeze)
- Reference platforms
- we should choose JDK1.6, "update 11" rather than "update 4"
- around "RC time", solidify the reference platform (it is the one we are testing on)
Jan 14:
- PMC component ownership x bugzilla pmc authorization