Community
Participate
Working Groups
Bugzilla product: Mylyn Builds Bugzilla components: B3, Framework, Hudson CVS location: /cvsroot/mylyn/builds Existing bugs for Hudson component: https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/buglist.cgi?query_format=advanced;short_desc=[hudson];short_desc_type=allwordssubstr;product=Mylyn;classification=Tools Existing bugs for Framework component: https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/buglist.cgi?query_format=advanced;short_desc=[build];short_desc_type=allwordssubstr;product=Mylyn;classification=Tools Existing CVS projects: /cvsroot/tools/org.eclipse.mylyn/sandbox/org.eclipse.mylyn.builds* -> /cvsroot/mylyn/builds /cvsroot/tools/org.eclipse.mylyn/sandbox/org.eclipse.mylyn.hudson* -> /cvsroot/mylyn/builds Existing CQs: 4123, 4124, 4218, 4361, 4393, 4441
We'll follow up with a list of initial committers soon.
Don't provide committer names here. We'll capture that in the NPPR. To create the NPPR, I'll need the project name/id. I could guess that the name is "Mylyn Builds" and the desired id is "mylyn.builds". As I stated in our email conversation, we'll have to get trademark approval on the name before we can continue with the creation/NPPR. As a rule, we implement a flat project structure. For example, B3 currently has it's own Bugzilla product. Moving forward, I'd like to see the same thing from Mylyn; specifically, mylyn.builds.framework, or "Mylyn Build Framework" should be its own Product in both Bugzilla and IPZilla. We discussed this some time ago; in retrospect, I should have seen the direction that you were going in the wiki document.
(In reply to comment #2) > Don't provide committer names here. We'll capture that in the NPPR. New Project Provisioning Request? > To create the NPPR, I'll need the project name/id. I could guess that the name > is "Mylyn Builds" and the desired id is "mylyn.builds". As I stated in our email > conversation, we'll have to get trademark approval on the name before we can > continue with the creation/NPPR. That sounds right to me. Mik? > As a rule, we implement a flat project structure. For example, B3 currently has > it's own Bugzilla product. Moving forward, I'd like to see the same thing from > Mylyn; specifically, mylyn.builds.framework, or "Mylyn Build Framework" should > be its own Product in both Bugzilla and IPZilla. Yes, the plan is to have one Mylyn Builds project with its own product. That project will both host the framework and reference implementation. The B3 component is a bit confusing. I think of it more as a "B3 Connector", i.e. a bridge between the Mylyn Build APIs and B3. AFAIK the B3 project itself will remain in its current place.
Another thought: The project should have Incubation status initially since none of the existing components have been released, yet.
(In reply to comment #3) > Yes, the plan is to have one Mylyn Builds project with its own product. That > project will both host the framework and reference implementation. The B3 > component is a bit confusing. I think of it more as a "B3 Connector", i.e. a > bridge between the Mylyn Build APIs and B3. AFAIK the B3 project itself will > remain in its current place. Yes, the (EMFT) b3 project will stay where it is. The b3 component of the Mylyn Builds project will leverage b3 aggregator technology to make it easy to consume the artifacts produced by builds (and published in p2 and/or Maven repositories).
Steffen and I have had this conversation a couple of times. Apparently, I can't keep it straight in my head. I can't be the only person who is confused by this; may I humbly suggest that we use component names like "B3 Connector" and "Hudson Connector" rather than "B3" and "Hudson"?
Good point, Wayne. I like short component names but in the interest of less confusion we should reconsider. I'll add this to Thursday's meeting agenda and send out an email to mylyn-dev.
+1 for the "Hudson Connector", "Bugzilla Connector", "CVS Connector", "Java Bridge", "CDT Bridge", ...
I have created mylyn.builds in the Foundation database. You can submit the NPPR at your leisure using this URL: http://www.eclipse.org/projects/project_provisioning_request.php?id=mylyn.builds
Kenn, the NPPR has to be filled out by a project lead. Could you please submit the form? The list of committers can be found here: http://wiki.eclipse.org/Mylyn/Restructuring#Versions_.28Incubation.29 . Email addresses should be in the CC. Suggested Bugzilla components: B3 Connector, Framework, Hudson Connector . Let me know if you need any further input.
(In reply to comment #10) > Kenn, the NPPR has to be filled out by a project lead. Could you please submit > the form? Sure. > Let me know if you need any further input. Who should the owner of each component be?
> Who should the owner of each component be? I would propose to use mylyn-inbox@eclipse.org for all components. The triage process which is documented under http://wiki.eclipse.org/Mylyn/Contributor_Reference#Triage has worked well for us in the past. All bugs go to the inbox initially until they are looked at and responded. At that point they are either assigned to a committer or mylyn-triaged@eclipse.org if sufficient input has been gathered to resolve the bug in the future.
(In reply to comment #12) > > Who should the owner of each component be? > > I would propose to use mylyn-inbox@eclipse.org for all components. > I used mylyn.builds-inbox@eclipse.org instead. If that's not good, we can change it.
Project has been provisioned.
When can we move the bugs and source? -M.
CQs as identified have been moved. Thanks, Sharon IP Team
(In reply to comment #15) > When can we move the bugs and source? We are ready from our end. Since the Mylyn Builds project is going to be hosted in Git we'll need to migrate the following 7 modules from CVS to Git: /cvsroot/tools/org.eclipse.mylyn/sandbox/org.eclipse.mylyn.builds.core /cvsroot/tools/org.eclipse.mylyn/sandbox/org.eclipse.mylyn.builds.tests /cvsroot/tools/org.eclipse.mylyn/sandbox/org.eclipse.mylyn.builds.ui /cvsroot/tools/org.eclipse.mylyn/sandbox/org.eclipse.mylyn.hudson.core /cvsroot/tools/org.eclipse.mylyn/sandbox/org.eclipse.mylyn.hudson-feature /cvsroot/tools/org.eclipse.mylyn/sandbox/org.eclipse.mylyn.hudson.tests /cvsroot/tools/org.eclipse.mylyn/sandbox/org.eclipse.mylyn.hudson.ui
Thanks for provisioning Bugzilla. Could we make a few minor changes? * Rename "Builds" product to "Mylyn Builds" * Rename "B3 connector" component to "B3 Connector" * Rename "Hudson connector" component to "Hudson Connector"
(In reply to comment #18) > * Rename "Builds" product to "Mylyn Builds" > * Rename "B3 connector" component to "B3 Connector" > * Rename "Hudson connector" component to "Hudson Connector" Done. So I can start the Git import this afternoon (after freezing cvs)? -M.
> So I can start the Git import this afternoon (after freezing cvs)? Yes, that would be great. We'll hold off committing until the import is complete.
One more question: should each component == a Git repo or are you looking to 'amalgamate' these into just 2 or 3 Git repos? -M.
I would prefer a single org.eclipse.mylyn.builds Git repository containing all plug-ins listed in comment 17.
Ok, I've created /gitroot/mylyn/org.eclipse.mylyn.builds.git and imported the data. Can you take a look (via ssh) and tell me if everything is as you expect? -M.
As far as I can tell everything looks good!
I have moved the CVS projects to /cvsroot/tools/org.eclipse.mylyn/zArchive/. Webmasters, can we make /gitroot/mylyn/org.eclipse.mylyn.builds.git group writeable? I think that's all left to do here.
Steffen, you should now be all set. FWIW, the config file in your repo also needed sharedrepository=1 to preserve the group writable aspect. I believe there is a description file in your repo which should contain the description of your repo. That will make it look nice on http://git.eclipse.org
Thanks! I have updated the description file and it looks like the sharedrepository flag is set.
