Community
Participate
Working Groups
WM = Webmaster(s) PMC = Project Management Chair REL = Release Engineer COMP = Component Owner Per steps outlined in http://wiki.eclipse.org/Modeling_Project_Component_Creation, MWE is ready to be created and its source migrated from Sourceforge to Eclipse. * [REL] add new component, with COMP as default assignee: DONE I've also created the cvs repo modules but they need to be set with the correct group ownership (emf-mwe, emf-mwe-releng). + [WM] create dev.eclipse.org userid for COMP; user requires a full shell, not a restricted one + [WM] add COMP to groups emf-mwe, emf-mwe-releng + [WM] add COMP to groups emftadmin (download.eclipse) & modeling-home (www.eclipse) + [WM] add REL to group emf-mwe-releng + [WM] change group id on /cvsroot/modeling/org.eclipse.emf/org.eclipse.emf.mwe/ to emf-mwe + [WM] change group id on /cvsroot/modeling/org.eclipse.emf/org.eclipse.emf.mwe.releng/ to emf-mwe-releng Bernd, your TODOs are: + [COMP] provide component description text to PMC & REL for website intro/detail & Bugzilla component description + [COMP] Third party code must be submitted to IPzilla for legal clearance before being committed to CVS. Note also that many 3rd party libraries are available via the Orbit project, and so can be added to the project at build time (rather than needing to be duplicated in CVS). Then, when the WM steps are done: + [COMP] commit code into /cvsroot/modeling/org.eclipse.emf/org.eclipse.emf.mwe/
Note that the vote for this component has been held, was successful, and is approved by the PMC: http://dev.eclipse.org/mhonarc/lists/emft-dev/msg00083.html
Note that the following people should all have access: Committers: Bernd Kolb - b.kolb@kolbware.de Component Lead / Website update privileges / Download server privileges Markus Voelter - voelter@acm.org Website update privileges / Download server privileges Arno Haase - arno@haase-consulting.de Sven Efftinge - sven@efftinge.de Website update privileges / Download server privileges Freddy Allilaire - freddy.allilaire@univ-nantes.fr Website update privileges / Download server privileges I believe each is already an Eclipse committer on other projects. Do I still need to fill out new committer request forms for each? Does anyone know what we have to do to have these components listed on the portal to when they are needed to initiate voting?
The code is already under review: https://dev.eclipse.org/ipzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1524 We are currently depending on ant, commons.logging and commons.cli. All of them have been approved for this component and all of them are already in the orbit project. A description could be: The Modeling Workflow Engine is an extensible framework for the integration and orchestration of model processing workflows. It comes with some basic components for and provides API for others to provide their own model processing tools. The component description can be found here: http://dev.eclipse.org/mhonarc/lists/emft-dev/pdfyXXaG0L5Hz.pdf We do only have one bugzilla component, right? Is there an other way to structure bugs then? It would help us if we could distinguish at least between core and ui in bugzilla. Debug and docs would also be useful.
I have seen that the MWE component has been created, but when I try to commit something into this CVS module it tells me that I do not have permissions for that. Isn't it yet ready or did I miss something?
(In reply to comment #3) > We do only have one bugzilla component, right? Is there an other way to > structure bugs then? It would help us if we could distinguish at least between > core and ui in bugzilla. Debug and docs would also be useful. As an EMFT component, you get one Bugzilla component. That's how it's been done for all the other components to date. Why not just use "[Core] some bug title" or "[Debug] feature request detail" when opening/processing bugs? Or use keywords? (In reply to comment #4) > I have seen that the MWE component has been created, but when I try to commit > something into this CVS module it tells me that I do not have permissions for > that. Isn't it yet ready or did I miss something? Well, someone has created group 'mwe-dev' but since this is an EMFT component, and EMFT is an EMF incubator, the correct groups should be 'emf-mwe' and 'emf-mwe-releng'. 'mew-dev' implies there is a project called MWE, not a component. Once these groups are created, and you've been assigned to both (and me to the second one), and WM has changed the group ownership on your two modules[1, 2]... THEN you'll be able to commit your code there. [1] /cvsroot/modeling/org.eclipse.emf/org.eclipse.emf.mwe (group emf-mwe) [2] /cvsroot/modeling/org.eclipse.emf/org.eclipse.emf.mwe.releng (group emf-mwe-releng)
Bugzilla keywords [1] include core, documentation, ui. I don't see one for debug, however. [1] https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/describekeywords.cgi
Did MWE follow the community notification process? http://www.eclipse.org/projects/dev_process/notifying-membership.php
Bjorn, Yes we did. Anne did send around such a mail some weeks ago. The mail has been sent to to all members, and committers. It has also been announced in several modeling lists
(In reply to comment #8) > Yes we did. Anne did send around such a mail some weeks ago. Great, thanks.
(In reply to comment #5) > As an EMFT component, you get one Bugzilla component. That's how it's been done > for all the other components to date. Why not just use "[Core] some bug title" > or "[Debug] feature request detail" when opening/processing bugs? Or use > keywords? > Sure, we can use keywords or some tags in the title. It is just that bug reporters do not care too much about keywords or [...] tags. But if there is no other way, we will use that.
(In reply to comment #10) > (In reply to comment #5) > Sure, we can use keywords or some tags in the title. It is just that bug > reporters do not care too much about keywords or [...] tags. But if there is > no other way, we will use that. Well, it *can* be done but then everyone will want it too and before you know it we'll be asking Denis to refactor the database so EMFT looks like TPTP [1], and I'll have created 60 new bugzilla components! But you're right, bug reporters often misfile bugs. I get lots in Modeling > Releng which should be in Modeling > [someproject] > [somecomponent]. I've also opened lots of bugs that have been moved and/or renamed by the receiving team to add "[something]" tags into the bug titles or to assign keywords, either because I opened it in the wrong place, or because that team uses "[something]" to make their project management easier. Or both. ;-) [1]https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/enter_bug.cgi?classification=TPTP
(In reply to comment #3) > A description could be: > The Modeling Workflow Engine is an extensible framework for the integration and > orchestration of model processing workflows. It comes with some basic > components for and provides API for others to provide their own model > processing tools. Posted to bugzilla component description and emft website. If you want something more lengthy posted on the website, attach the html/images as a zip and I'll post it. You'll also want similar content in the wiki: http://wiki.eclipse.org/Model_Workflow_Engine_(MWE) I've linked that from http://wiki.eclipse.org/EMFT and http://www.eclipse.org/emft/, but if you prefer a shorter name, by all means, we can change that. Compare has a good example of how to post content in both places: http://www.eclipse.org/modeling/emft/?project=compare#compare and http://wiki.eclipse.org/index.php/EMF_Compare You'll also notice that I shortened your component's name on the website to "Model Workflow" because it fits better on the left nav. I could do "MWE" instead, but I though Model Workflow was more descriptive. Your call, it's an easy change, but bear in mind that what goes on the left nav also appears everywhere else (like the component picker boxes for downloads and release notes).
(In reply to comment #5) > > Once these groups are created, and you've been assigned to both (and me to the > second one), and WM has changed the group ownership on your two modules[1, > 2]... THEN you'll be able to commit your code there. > Can you send me a short notification then please? Thanks (In reply to comment #12) > But you're right, bug reporters often misfile bugs. I get lots in Modeling > > Releng which should be in Modeling > [someproject] > [somecomponent]. I've > also opened lots of bugs that have been moved and/or renamed by the receiving > team to add "[something]" tags into the bug titles or to assign keywords, > either because I opened it in the wrong place, or because that team uses > "[something]" to make their project management easier. Or both. ;-) Sure, by having components, you do not get rid of misfiled bugs. But I think you can reduce them. Nevertheless: If we do not have (an easy way) to achieve this we can stop discussing this ;-) (In reply to comment #12) > You'll also notice that I shortened your component's name on the website to > "Model Workflow" because it fits better on the left nav. OK. Would it be possible to change Model Workflow to Modeling Workflow? Thanks
(In reply to comment #13) > > Once these groups are created, and you've been assigned to both (and me to the > > second one), and WM has changed the group ownership on your two modules[1, > > 2]... THEN you'll be able to commit your code there. > Can you send me a short notification then please? Traditionally when this is done the WM will put a note in the bug, so yes, you'll be notified. > OK. Would it be possible to change Model Workflow to Modeling Workflow? Done. I'll also rename the wiki page/links.
After talking to EMO legal I'm looking for PMC confirmation of comment #5 that this is in fact a EMFT component and not an EMF component. If this is an EMF component then we'll need NCRFs for all those listed in comment #2. As an EMFT component shouldn't the correct group names be emft-mwe & emft-mwe-releng ? -M.
(In reply to comment #15) > After talking to EMO legal I'm looking for PMC confirmation of comment #5 that this is in fact a EMFT component and not an EMF component. This is definitely an EMFT component, at least until such time as it graduates and migrates from EMFT -> EMF. (We'll do the paperwork then.) That said, I'm not the PMC here, so I'll let Ed add his +1. > As an EMFT component shouldn't the correct group names be emft-mwe & > emft-mwe-releng ? Your call -- it's just more things you'll have to change later on, when this moves from EMFT to EMF (in a year or two?). I like the group-name-follows-cvs-dir-structure approach (emf-componentName), but if you prefer the group-name-follows-web-dir-structure approach (emft-componentName), that's fine too. Bear in mind too that we currently have: (new components) emf-compare [cbrun, ...] emf-compare-releng [cbrun, nickb, ...] emf-jcrm [sboehme, ...] emf-jcrm-releng [sboehme, nickb, ...] emf-search [lbigearde, ...] emf-search-releng [lbigearde, nickb, ...] (old components, renames pending completion of bug 198541, bug 197174, bug 202417 and bug 202418) emft-teneo [mtaal] emft-net4j [this one is used for both CDO and Net4j, since both components have only a single committer, estepper] emft-releng [deprecated once bug 202417 and bug 202418 are done]
+1 on having consistent names with the other EMFT components that exist within /cvsroot/modeling/emf. Note that Bjorn approved keeping the EMFT components and the EMF components in a common folder structure (to make it less disruptive as components graduate from incubation in EMFT to become part of EMF). This is an EMFT component, so I think the committer forms were properly filled out already...
Any progress here? Thanks Bernd
(In reply to comment #18) > Any progress here? Pending the outcome of the emft-* vs. emf-* group name debate, I've moved the two cvs modules so that they are now group-pwned by m2t-dev, which will allow Bernd to proceed w/ committing his code to CVS and setting up his releng module. Whenever the group name thing is sorted out, this *HACK* can be fixed easily by just chown'ing the dirs recursively.
(In reply to comment #19) > Pending the outcome of the emft-* vs. emf-* group name debate, I've moved the > two cvs modules so that they are now group-pwned by m2t-dev, which will allow > Bernd to proceed w/ committing his code to CVS and setting up his releng > module. On second thought, this seems like a process violation / Very Bad Idea, so I've undone this, and we're back to waiting for the webmasters to do the `chown` the correct way.
The group names need to be emft-* in order to be consistent with the legal paperwork. I understand the argument for emf-*, but sometimes the world is not a perfect place: please use emft-* group names. Thanks.
(In reply to comment #21) > The group names need to be emft-* in order to be consistent with the legal > paperwork. I understand the argument for emf-*, but sometimes the world is not > a perfect place: please use emft-* group names. Thanks. Very well. A decision is better than no decision, and being consistent is better than not being consistent, so I'm satisfied. ;-) See bug 204510 for a related TODO for the webmasters. (In reply to comment #15) > As an EMFT component shouldn't the correct group names be emft-mwe & > emft-mwe-releng ? Per Bjorn's comments above, YES. So, revising the TODOs from Comment #0: + [WM] add COMP to groups emft-mwe, emft-mwe-releng + [WM] add COMP to groups emftadmin (download.eclipse) & modeling-home (www.eclipse) + [WM] add REL to group emft-mwe-releng + [WM] change group id on /cvsroot/modeling/org.eclipse.emf/org.eclipse.emf.mwe/ to emft-mwe + [WM] change group id on /cvsroot/modeling/org.eclipse.emf/org.eclipse.emf.mwe.releng/ to emft-mwe-releng
I've created the emtf-mwe & emft-mwe-releng groups and changed the group ownership of the .mwe and .mwe.releng directories. -M.
Thanks a lot! Bjorn, can you please update the portal by adding me there as component lead for the mwe component and adding the initial committers?
Can you please provide a full login shell for me, so I can do build promotes? Thanks
Done. -M.
I think this bug is done. Bernd, please verify that everything listed on the wiki[1] is complete. [1]http://wiki.eclipse.org/Modeling_Project_Component_Creation Please itemize anything that the Webmasters or I need to do for you. Build related stuff can be placed in bug 204600.
As far as i can see, we are done. Thanks a lot for your help!!! Bernd
Move to verified as per bug 206558.
