Bugzilla – Full Text Bug Listing
| Summary: | Marketplace listings should require a valid installable unit | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | Community | Reporter: | Ian Skerrett <ian.skerrett> | ||||||
| Component: | Marketplace | Assignee: | Marketplace Inbox <marketplace-inbox> | ||||||
| Status: | RESOLVED WONTFIX | QA Contact: | |||||||
| Severity: | normal | ||||||||
| Priority: | P3 | CC: | chris.guindon, reckord | ||||||
| Version: | unspecified | ||||||||
| Target Milestone: | --- | ||||||||
| Hardware: | PC | ||||||||
| OS: | Windows NT | ||||||||
| Whiteboard: | |||||||||
| Attachments: |
|
||||||||
|
Description
Ian Skerrett
The entries that would be lost by this would be 1. Training entries (e.g. https://marketplace.eclipse.org/content/birt-training-support-consulting-actuate), which can not provide an IU 2. Entries for RCP Products which cannot be installed into existing Eclipses. Reasons for this might include a) Products not fitting into the IDE (something like XMind, though they're not in the Marketplace - it uses a very stripped down RCP core and minimizes the UI a lot) b) Products using alternative rendering (like OpenGL or JavaFX), e.g. Bling (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p9g5mzKiEtc - not on the marketplace either) c) Products needing a native installer (e.g. due to required native libraries or using some sort of license control software) d) Products that need very strict control over platform versions (e.g. due to certification requirements) 3. Other marketplaces on eclipse.org, where IUs in the Eclipse sense aren't meaningful, e.g. SmartHome/IoT I don't know what the policy and strategy towards 1. is, but I guess both 1. and 3. could just be treated separately. Regarding 2., I'm not sure. I guess by requiring IUs and installability as a plug-in, it could be possible to get more providers of RCP-only solutions to invest into making their solution work as a plug-in. On the other hand, there might be a good portion of RCPs, for which this just isn't feasible. (In reply to Carsten Reckord from comment #1) > The entries that would be lost by this would be FWIW, I was just imaging this would apply to the Tools Market. (In reply to Ian Skerrett from comment #0) > I think it is time we make it a requirement that all Eclipse Marketplace > listings have a valid installable unit. For the most part, it seems most new > listings will have an installable unit so I don't think this is an issue. > > We would need to define how to handle the current listings without an > installable unit. I would suggest the following: > 1. Run a report to see how many listings don't have installable units and > ideally have the last update date for each of these listings. > 2. We send an email to all these listings telling them we are going to make > installable units a requirements and they need to update their listing. > 3. We give everyone 90 days to make the change. If they don't have the > change then we delete the list. This might results in a lot of listings > being deleted. > > Thoughts? 1. +1 For making IU a required for listings under the tool market 2. I am planing to build this report this week. I suggest we plan on sending out an e-mail to listings owners without an installable unit by the end of this week. 3. I suggest we start make the installable unit fields required by the end of the month of June. This will require listings owners to add an Installable units before they can make additional updates to their listing. In august, we delete all listings without an installable unit. (In reply to Christopher Guindon from comment #3) > (In reply to Ian Skerrett from comment #0) > > I think it is time we make it a requirement that all Eclipse Marketplace > > listings have a valid installable unit. For the most part, it seems most new > > listings will have an installable unit so I don't think this is an issue. > > > > We would need to define how to handle the current listings without an > > installable unit. I would suggest the following: > > 1. Run a report to see how many listings don't have installable units and > > ideally have the last update date for each of these listings. > > 2. We send an email to all these listings telling them we are going to make > > installable units a requirements and they need to update their listing. > > 3. We give everyone 90 days to make the change. If they don't have the > > change then we delete the list. This might results in a lot of listings > > being deleted. > > > > Thoughts? > > 1. +1 For making IU a required for listings under the tool market > > 2. I am planing to build this report this week. I suggest we plan on sending > out an e-mail to listings owners without an installable unit by the end of > this week. Before you send the email can you please share the report on this bug. I would like to see how many listings do not have installable units and their last update date to see how current those listings are. > > 3. I suggest we start make the installable unit fields required by the end > of the month of June. This will require listings owners to add an > Installable units before they can make additional updates to their listing. > > In august, we delete all listings without an installable unit. Before we make a final decision can we please first see the report. Created attachment 268617 [details] Reports > Tools (Missing IU) (In reply to Ian Skerrett from comment #4) > (In reply to Christopher Guindon from comment #3) > > (In reply to Ian Skerrett from comment #0) > > > I think it is time we make it a requirement that all Eclipse Marketplace > > > listings have a valid installable unit. For the most part, it seems most new > > > listings will have an installable unit so I don't think this is an issue. > > > > > > We would need to define how to handle the current listings without an > > > installable unit. I would suggest the following: > > > 1. Run a report to see how many listings don't have installable units and > > > ideally have the last update date for each of these listings. > > > 2. We send an email to all these listings telling them we are going to make > > > installable units a requirements and they need to update their listing. > > > 3. We give everyone 90 days to make the change. If they don't have the > > > change then we delete the list. This might results in a lot of listings > > > being deleted. > > > > > > Thoughts? > > > > 1. +1 For making IU a required for listings under the tool market > > > > 2. I am planing to build this report this week. I suggest we plan on sending > > out an e-mail to listings owners without an installable unit by the end of > > this week. > > Before you send the email can you please share the report on this bug. I > would like to see how many listings do not have installable units and their > last update date to see how current those listings are. > > > > > 3. I suggest we start make the installable unit fields required by the end > > of the month of June. This will require listings owners to add an > > Installable units before they can make additional updates to their listing. > > > > In august, we delete all listings without an installable unit. > > Before we make a final decision can we please first see the report. Attaching a report of listings in the Tools market without a solution version. I've removed the email of each owner for this public report. Marketplace moderator/admins should have access to this report via this url: https://marketplace.eclipse.org/reports/tools-missing-iu https://marketplace.eclipse.org/reports/tools-missing-iu.csv Created attachment 268618 [details]
Reports > Tools (Missing IU) - FIXED
I am adding the report again. The formatting is wrong on the previous one.
(In reply to Christopher Guindon from comment #6) > Created attachment 268618 [details] > Reports > Tools (Missing IU) - FIXED > > I am adding the report again. The formatting is wrong on the previous one. Actually, the order was wrong again in this second report. It seems that libra office alter my document when I delete a column. I've removed the email from the report and made both reports available to all. Please use the links to download the latest report for this: https://marketplace.eclipse.org/reports/tools-missing-iu https://marketplace.eclipse.org/reports/tools-missing-iu.csv This report include 483 listings from the Tools market without an IU. From this list, only 29 listings were updated since 2016. (In reply to Christopher Guindon from comment #7) > > https://marketplace.eclipse.org/reports/tools-missing-iu > https://marketplace.eclipse.org/reports/tools-missing-iu.csv > > This report include 483 listings from the Tools market without an IU. From > this list, only 29 listings were updated since 2016. Thanks for the report. Many of these listings are standalone products that don't get installed into an Eclipse workspace. They are certainly valid listings so I am having second thoughts on if this is the right thing to do. (In reply to Ian Skerrett from comment #8) > (In reply to Christopher Guindon from comment #7) > > > > > https://marketplace.eclipse.org/reports/tools-missing-iu > > https://marketplace.eclipse.org/reports/tools-missing-iu.csv > > > > This report include 483 listings from the Tools market without an IU. From > > this list, only 29 listings were updated since 2016. > > Thanks for the report. Many of these listings are standalone products that > don't get installed into an Eclipse workspace. They are certainly valid > listings so I am having second thoughts on if this is the right thing to do. I see, since they are valid instances where a listing might not have an installable unit. I am closing this bug has WONT FIX. Please re-open if you change your mind! |