Skip to main content
Jump to: navigation, search

Difference between revisions of "ECF Conference Call 11.25.2008"

(Noting that I won't be there and some rtcollab stuff.)
Line 1: Line 1:
 +
==Attendees==
 +
*Remy is on vacation in London and will not be attending.
 +
==Agenda==
 +
===Discovery UI===
 
org.eclipse.ecf.discovery.ui vs. Versant's contribution built on top of EMF (replace or keep both)
 
org.eclipse.ecf.discovery.ui vs. Versant's contribution built on top of EMF (replace or keep both)
 
* depends upon >=2.4 org.eclipse.emf.core, org.eclipse.emf.common, org.eclipse.emf.edit, org.eclipse.emf.edit.ui
 
* depends upon >=2.4 org.eclipse.emf.core, org.eclipse.emf.common, org.eclipse.emf.edit, org.eclipse.emf.edit.ui
 
* Java5 (new Locks API, generics)
 
* Java5 (new Locks API, generics)
 
Add incubation to build (create an incubation feature)
 
Add incubation to build (create an incubation feature)
 +
 +
===Real-time Collaboration===
 +
Remy is investigating the distribution and synchronization of workspace resources at the project level (see {{bug|239048}}).
 +
 +
Discussed with Neil briefly over this:
 +
*Are there real use cases? It sounds cool, yes, but who's going to use this?
 +
**Assumes "everything" is in synchronize prior to sharing the project.
 +
**If this is not true, a long time may be required to synchronize the two before work can begin.
 +
*Will this encourage novice hackers to not use an SCM system and to then use it as a poor man's peer-to-peer SCM system?

Revision as of 16:26, 24 November 2008

Attendees

  • Remy is on vacation in London and will not be attending.

Agenda

Discovery UI

org.eclipse.ecf.discovery.ui vs. Versant's contribution built on top of EMF (replace or keep both)

  • depends upon >=2.4 org.eclipse.emf.core, org.eclipse.emf.common, org.eclipse.emf.edit, org.eclipse.emf.edit.ui
  • Java5 (new Locks API, generics)

Add incubation to build (create an incubation feature)

Real-time Collaboration

Remy is investigating the distribution and synchronization of workspace resources at the project level (see bug 239048).

Discussed with Neil briefly over this:

  • Are there real use cases? It sounds cool, yes, but who's going to use this?
    • Assumes "everything" is in synchronize prior to sharing the project.
    • If this is not true, a long time may be required to synchronize the two before work can begin.
  • Will this encourage novice hackers to not use an SCM system and to then use it as a poor man's peer-to-peer SCM system?

Back to the top