Community
Participate
Working Groups
Is it time to finally create http://www.eclipse.org/athena so that we can have an actual website, as well as a project-plan page such as: http://www.eclipse.org/projects/project-plan.php?projectid=technology.dash.athena instead of the current hacky URL: http://www.eclipse.org/projects/project-plan.php?planurl=http://www.eclipse.org/dash/athena/project-info/plan.xml&component=Athena What else needs to be done here to formalize a little?
I should mention that the current Athena "homepage" is this: http://wiki.eclipse.org/Athena_Common_Build
Athena is still listed as an active subproject/component of SOC. Was a move review done? (i.e. is the database out of sync, or did we forget to do something?) Since Athena is not currently a formal component/subproject, I believe that we're looking at a creation/move review.
(In reply to comment #2) > Athena is still listed as an active subproject/component of SOC. Was a move > review done? (i.e. is the database out of sync, or did we forget to do > something?) That's a mistake. There was a SOC subproject last summer which is tangentially related to the work in Athena and ought to be moved from that cvs repo over into Dash, but the core work we've been doing since June '08 is a whole new project. That project will need a ton of refactoring to be useful in Athena, since almost everything has been simplified and refactored to make adoption crazy simple. Well, simpler, anyway. > Since Athena is not currently a formal component/subproject, I believe that > we're looking at a creation/move review. Whatever floats your process. Given that Bjorn was involved as one of the initial three committers (along with myself and Denis Roy), and at the time was the PMC for Technology... uh, are you sure this wasn't already done? Do I need to draft some slides?
What subcomponent of Dash has Athena been developed under? Is "Common Builder" AFAICT, some steps were missed in creating the Dash/Athena "component". Let me propose the following: Let's do move/archive/move review of SOC/Athena to Dash/Athena. We'll move the SOC/Athena subproject to Dash/Athena; this is mostly from a Foundation bookkeeping POV (i.e. we'll update our database), UNIX groups, that sort of thing. In the process, we'll archive the current contents of SOC/Athena The final move is really just some more bookkeeping. We'll be (effectively) moving the existing code from "common builder" subproject into Dash/Athena. This won't require any actual moving since the code is already there. If this makes sense, please start building the docuware. Just do the minimum amount of work necessary: a short document describing what we're planning to do should suffice.
(In reply to comment #4) > What subcomponent of Dash has Athena been developed under? Is "Common Builder" Yes, Athena == Common Builder. Common Builder and Common Build Infrastructure == lame names; Athena == less lame, IMHO. This is an exercise in rebranding & (better?) marketing. > Let's do move/archive/move review of SOC/Athena to Dash/Athena. > We'll move the SOC/Athena subproject to Dash/Athena; this is mostly from a > Foundation bookkeeping POV (i.e. we'll update our database), UNIX groups, that > sort of thing. Cool. Then I can update the wiki page that lists where sources live. http://wiki.eclipse.org/Common_Build_Infrastructure#Sources I suggest this move: $ mkdir /cvsroot/technology/org.eclipse.dash/athena/org.eclipse.metagen/; \ mv /cvsroot/technology/org.eclipse.soc/athena/* \ /cvsroot/technology/org.eclipse.dash/athena/org.eclipse.metagen/ > In the process, we'll archive the current contents of SOC/Athena Well, if the project has any hope of becoming what I envision as an "Athena UI" to help generate a .releng project from wizards, then why not keep it open? > The final move is really just some more bookkeeping. We'll be (effectively) > moving the existing code from "common builder" subproject into Dash/Athena. > This won't require any actual moving since the code is already there. Yep, it's just rebranding/renaming. > If this makes sense, please start building the docuware. Just do the minimum > amount of work necessary: a short document describing what we're planning to do > should suffice. You mean copy this bug into a slide? Can you give me an example of what you need? I've never done this before...
Sorry Nick. This is getting a bit away from me. I think that I'm trying to fill in too many gaps myself. Can you succinctly describe the current and desired final states for SOC/Athena and Dash/Athena so that we can slap together the minimal docuware that provides the simplest possible mapping from one state to the other?
> Can you succinctly describe the current and desired final states for SOC/Athena > and Dash/Athena so that we can slap together the minimal docuware that provides > the simplest possible mapping from one state to the other? http://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=rHUk1R-lvfb-zTjtkGZDxWw How's that?
Ok. After two months of careful consideration, I think I've got it. -- Athena Common Builder Restructuring/Move/Termination Review The technology.dash.commonbuild component has reached a level of maturity where we need to acknowledge that it is a proper project in its own right. The current Eclipse Development Process indicates that the terms "component" and "project" are synonymous, and so we are simply acknowledging that the project already exists and are asking that it be provided with the services commonly afforded a project such as a dedicated website, newsgroup, and mailing list. As part of this restructuring, we would like to change the id of the project to technology.dash.athena and the name to "Athena Common Builder". Further, we want to move the code from technology.soc.athena in to technology.dash.athena and archive technology.soc.athena. This SOC subproject is tangentially related to the work in Athena and ought to be moved from that cvs repository over into Dash. The technology.soc.athena project should then be terminated and archived. This project has reached its natural conclusion and development has halted. The IP generated by this project will be assumed by the technology.dash.athena project. The /cvsroot/technology:org.eclipse.soc/athena CVS directory must be archived. There are no mailing lists, newsgroups, or wiki pages associated with this SOC component. To summarize: * Rename technology.dash.commonbuild to technology.dash.athena * Acknowledge technology.dash.athena as a proper project and provision accordingly * Move code from technology.soc.athena into technology.dash.athena * Terminate technology.soc.athena -- Does that about summarize it? (you can provide specific details in the NPPR after approval) Do we have to pull over any committers from technology.soc.athena? We'll need an IP Log for the technology.soc.athena code.
(In reply to comment #8) > Ok. After two months of careful consideration ... of squirrels in mah window ... :P > * Rename technology.dash.commonbuild to technology.dash.athena > * Acknowledge technology.dash.athena as a proper project and provision > accordingly > * Move code from technology.soc.athena into technology.dash.athena > * Terminate technology.soc.athena +1. > Does that about summarize it? (you can provide specific details in the NPPR > after approval) See http://spreadsheets1.google.com/ccc?key=rHUk1R-lvfb-zTjtkGZDxWw for tech specs. > Do we have to pull over any committers from technology.soc.athena? No, it was just me and the SoC student... haven't heard from him since last summer, so I suspect he's moved on to bigger and better assignments since. > We'll need an IP Log for the technology.soc.athena code. * Michael Robb, GSoC student from 2007-2008 (two summers). * Nick Boldt, GSoC mentor (same two two summers) and Dash committer. Also had a CQ submitted for NanoHTTPD https://dev.eclipse.org/ipzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1624 I believe that's it. What format do you want for the IP log?
Slap the words that I gave you into a document (HTML preferred) and send it to emo@ with a request for the review. Send the IP Log top emo-ip-team@ in HTML format. Try to follow the format generated by the Automated IP Log Tool [1]. Clearly, the IP Log is short, so most sections will be empty. Are there any CQs for technology.soc.athena? [1]http://www.eclipse.org/projects/ip_log.php?projectid=technology.dash
Created attachment 142711 [details] ip log in html format
Created attachment 142714 [details] move review text in html format
(In reply to comment #10) > Slap the words that I gave you into a document (HTML preferred) and send it to > emo@ with a request for the review. Send the IP Log top emo-ip-team@ in HTML > format. Try to follow the format generated by the Automated IP Log Tool [1]. > Clearly, the IP Log is short, so most sections will be empty. Done. See attachments above. > Are there any CQs for technology.soc.athena? The only CQ mentioned for NanoHTTPD was for Michael's SOC project. Everything else is EPL stuff I've done mahself, with contributions from Kim, Andrew, Andrew, etc.
Created attachment 142803 [details] ip log in html format - soc.athena ONLY as requested, here's the ip log for just the soc.athena stuff.
Created attachment 143447 [details] Revised log I've removed the reference to the BSD-style license. The License Section of the log is to contain the license information of the Project which is EPL or could be EDL/EPL. Therefore, I believe entering Modified BSD is incorrect. The About Files identifies other licenses associated with the distribution and the only information we require here is EPL in this case.
Athena Team, Since there has *not* been a request from a member of the Eclipse community to hold the Restructuring Review on a conference call, there will be no Review Call tomorrow (August 19, 2009). The EMO has declared this review to be successful based on the review docuware and on community feedback. Congratulations to the Athena team on their successful review. Please contact emo@eclipse.org with any questions. Thanks.
OK, so what's the next step? Moving stuff in CVS? Creating http://www.eclipse.org/athena/ ? Details here: http://spreadsheets.google.com/lv?key=rHUk1R-lvfb-zTjtkGZDxWw&pli=1
Webmaster: Do you have enough information to make this happen? What more do you require?
I believe new projects require a new project provisioning request: http://www.eclipse.org/projects/project_provisioning_request.php Nick, go ahead and fill that out, and we'll take it from here.
(In reply to comment #19) > http://www.eclipse.org/projects/project_provisioning_request.php > Nick, go ahead and fill that out, and we'll take it from here. Tried to do technology.dash.athena but it refused, so I submitted technology.athena. Hope that's cool. Also, I had to guess at Bjorn's email address.
How would you like the bugzilla part of this handled? I'm asking because presently 'Common Builder' is already a 'component' which means it can't have more sub-components. Should I pre-pend 'Athena' to the components requested in the NPPR, or make 'Athena' a bugzilla product and move the current bugs to one of the new components? -M.
(In reply to comment #21) > How would you like the bugzilla part of this handled? I'm asking because > presently 'Common Builder' is already a 'component' which means it can't have > more sub-components. Should I pre-pend 'Athena' to the components requested in > the NPPR, or make 'Athena' a bugzilla product and move the current bugs to one > of the new components? > > -M. If we're promoting it from 'component' to 'project' (or 'product', in Bugzilla parlance), then shouldn't it be moved from: technology.dash.common builder to technology.dash athena.[components as outlined in the NPPR] ?
>If we're promoting it from 'component' to 'project' (or 'product', in Bugzilla >parlance) We don't have to make it a product, but if we don't then the components list for Dash may get a tad cluttered. > technology.dash athena.[components as outlined in the NPPR] Works for me, I just need to know where to assign the current bugs. -M.
(In reply to comment #23) > > technology.dash athena.[components as outlined in the NPPR] > Works for me, I just need to know where to assign the current bugs. If you don't want to get fancy moving them based on a logical assumptive mapping between bug title and new component bucket (read: waste time assigning them one by one), then... pick one target bucket and move them all into that one. I can reorg them later.
Ok, I've moved all of the bugs into the 'Build' component under 'Dash Athena'. At this time I"m just waiting for the scripts to create the mailing list and then I'll send you the 'all done' note. -M.
I've just sent Nick the 'new project' email. -M.
Can we mark the old Dash > Common Builder component as deprecated, with a pointer to the new Dash Athena product? OLD, deprecated: https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/enter_bug.cgi?product=Dash&component=Common%20Builder NEW, active: https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/enter_bug.cgi?product=Dash+Athena
I think the faster solution is just to delete the old common build component. Will that cause a problem? -M.
(In reply to comment #28) > I think the faster solution is just to delete the old common build component. > Will that cause a problem? It'll cause broken links from wiki pages, but that's fairly easy to remedy. Too bad there's no fulltext search for the wiki so I can find all pages w/ links to Bugzilla... Other moved projects [1] have this - why can't Athena? [1]https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/enter_bug.cgi?product=Platform&component=Update++(deprecated%20-%20use%20RT%3EEquinox%3Ep2) Or better... should the other old deprecated components be removed too?
Good question - bug 249506 has the details. I've updated the description, I just thought I'd ask. -M
I've replaced every occurrence of a link to a bugzilla query for product Dash and component Common Builder in the wiki I can find with the new product Dash Athena query. So... if you decide to delete old/deprecated/moved components across the board, I should be fine. Thanks!
Webmaster, the move of the SOC/Athena components, as described in comment #5 slipped through the cracks. Can you implement this?
Done. -M.
Sorry Matt, one more piece. Can you please archive the technology/org.eclipse.soc/athena directory? I don't think that we created any special mailing lists, newsgroups, or other resources for this component, so I think that's it. Anne, can you mark the technology.soc.athena project as archived in the database?
I've archived the athena directory and placed it here: archive.eclipse.org/technology/archives/athena.soc.tgz -M.
Closing. -M.
