Hi all, As Nick announced some days ago, we have planned to move to Tycho 0.17. We've made several successful tests with the staging version of Tycho 0.17, and some of you have reported some successful tests too, and no-one reported a blocker. So current snapshot of parent pom was updated to use Tycho 0.17: https://github.com/jbosstools/jbosstools-build/commit/6c8db1619a3b10bdae0... It has been built and is now available on Nexus, so Tycho 0.17 is now used by default by all local builds and CI jobs for master. Enjoy! -- Mickael Istria Eclipse developer at JBoss, by Red Hat <http://www.jboss.org/tools> My blog <http://mickaelistria.wordpress.com> - My Tweets <http://twitter.com/mickaelistria> _______________________________________________ jbosstools-dev mailing list jbosstools-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbosstools-dev

On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 05:44:39PM +0100, Mickael Istria wrote: > Hi all, > > As Nick announced some days ago, we have planned to move to Tycho 0.17. > We've made several successful tests with the staging version of Tycho > 0.17, and some of you have reported some successful tests too, and > no-one reported a blocker. > > So current snapshot of parent pom was updated to use Tycho 0.17: https://github.com/jbosstools/jbosstools-build/commit/6c8db1619a3b10bdae0... > It has been built and is now available on Nexus, so Tycho 0.17 is now > used by default by all local builds and CI jobs for master. eh - you mean "it is being used for builds that uses Alpha2-SNAPSHOT parent pom, which is *not* every component yet is it ? (at least not in my latest pulls) Note: this is perfectly fine - but just sometihng to be aware of and stop thinking that just because the parent pom snapshot version changes it does not mean everything starts using this. Stability/non-suprises FTW! :) /max > Enjoy! > -- > Mickael Istria > Eclipse developer at JBoss, by Red Hat <http://www.jboss.org/tools> > My blog <http://mickaelistria.wordpress.com> - My Tweets > <http://twitter.com/mickaelistria> > _______________________________________________ > jbosstools-dev mailing list > jbosstools-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbosstools-dev _______________________________________________ jbosstools-dev mailing list jbosstools-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbosstools-dev

I'm fine to look but what changes in the parent pom requires *all* to point to alpha2? /max On Sat, Mar 23, 2013 at 10:23:00AM -0400, Nick Boldt wrote: > IMHO, *all projects that are feeding binaries to JBoss Tools > 4.1.0.Alpha2 should be building with the JBoss Tools parent pom > version 4.1.0.Alpha2-SNAPSHOT.* > > If they are not, then *they should update their root pom ASAP to > achieve that*. > > Perhaps one of the github admins (who have God Mode) can do a quick > check and push through changes up to the origin to ensure everyone is > conforming? > > Thanks! > > On 03/22/2013 04:02 PM, Max Rydahl Andersen wrote: >> On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 05:44:39PM +0100, Mickael Istria wrote: >>> Hi all, >>> >>> As Nick announced some days ago, we have planned to move to Tycho 0.17. >>> We've made several successful tests with the staging version of Tycho >>> 0.17, and some of you have reported some successful tests too, and >>> no-one reported a blocker. >>> >>> So current snapshot of parent pom was updated to use Tycho 0.17: >>> https://github.com/jbosstools/jbosstools-build/commit/6c8db1619a3b10bdae0... >>> >>> It has been built and is now available on Nexus, so Tycho 0.17 is now >>> used by default by all local builds and CI jobs for master. >> >> eh - you mean "it is being used for builds that uses Alpha2-SNAPSHOT >> parent pom, >> which is *not* every component yet is it ? (at least not in my latest >> pulls) >> >> Note: this is perfectly fine - but just sometihng to be aware of and >> stop >> thinking that just because the parent pom snapshot version changes it >> does not >> mean everything starts using this. Stability/non-suprises FTW! :) >> /max >> >>> Enjoy! >>> -- >>> Mickael Istria >>> Eclipse developer at JBoss, by Red Hat <http://www.jboss.org/tools> >>> My blog <http://mickaelistria.wordpress.com> - My Tweets >>> <http://twitter.com/mickaelistria> >> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> jbosstools-dev mailing list >>> jbosstools-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbosstools-dev >> >> _______________________________________________ >> jbosstools-dev mailing list >> jbosstools-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbosstools-dev >> > > -- > Nick Boldt :: JBoss by Red Hat > Productization Lead :: JBoss Tools & Dev Studio > http://nick.divbyzero.com

On 03/24/2013 05:51 PM, Nick Boldt wrote: > How about the fact that the parent pom now includes Tycho 0.17.0? Isn't that a good enough reason? :D Using Tycho 0.17 fixed some of our Jiras (Source feature title and description), so there is benefit in moving to Tycho 0.17.

On 03/25/2013 04:36 PM, Martin Malina wrote: > So I would encourage everybody to create a sourceTemplateFeature/feature.properties with desired properties. I agree with you. I suggested to the Tycho team another "%featureName (with Sources)" name but since Platform has moved to Tycho and doesn't want anything to change (even their bad things such as this crappy name), Tycho devs chose to use the Platform convention as default... So yeah, if you don't like it, override it in sourceTemplateFeature/feature.properties.

Cheers, -- Mickael Istria Eclipse developer at JBoss, by Red Hat My blog - My Tweets

On 03/24/2013 05:51 PM, Nick Boldt wrote: >How about the fact that the parent pom now includes Tycho 0.17.0? >Isn't that a good enough reason? :D

Using Tycho 0.17 fixed some of our Jiras (Source feature title and description), so there is benefit in moving to Tycho 0.17. Although it's not a requirement in order to be part of JBoss Tools aggregation, it's highly recommended for components to continue their development using the newer parent pom and version of Tycho, because the quality of output is better.

-- Mickael Istria Eclipse developer at JBoss, by Red Hat <http://www.jboss.org/tools> My blog <http://mickaelistria.wordpress.com> - My Tweets <http://twitter.com/mickaelistria>

What would be a good thing to get in source features ? couldn't we do this more intelligently with a resource copy trick replacing the feature name properly ?

+1. Everyone else in eclipse.org-land already uses "Developer Re*SOURCES*" for their *SOURCES* so people will figure it out... especially when on the second page of the p2 Install Manager where they see that the IUs they selected all end with .feature.*SOURCE*. N On 03/26/2013 05:03 AM, Mickael Istria wrote: >On 03/25/2013 08:42 PM, Max Rydahl Andersen wrote: >>What would be a good thing to get in source features ? couldn't we do >>this more intelligently with a resource copy trick replacing the >>feature name properly ? >On our JBT site, Source features are available under a "Sources" >category. IMO it's explicit enough and we can keep the default >"Developer Resources" name extension. People will understand. >-- >Mickael Istria >Eclipse developer at JBoss, by Red Hat <http://www.jboss.org/tools> >My blog <http://mickaelistria.wordpress.com> - My Tweets ><http://twitter.com/mickaelistria> -- Nick Boldt :: JBoss by Red Hat Productization Lead :: JBoss Tools & Dev Studio http://nick.divbyzero.com