4:04 p.m.
On 12/09/2015 03:56 PM, André Dietisheim wrote:
I added org.eclipse.swt 3.104.1 as required plugins to openshift.ui
and express.ui, shouldnt this trigger updated swt to get installed
along JBT?
https://github.com/jbosstools/jbosstools-openshift/pull/838
People who're using
Mars.0 and installing this OpenShift version will
see a remediation page that will force them to update their whole IDE to
Mars.1 (because SWT version is hardcoded in Platform, and using newer
SWT implies using newer Platform).
I don't know if this is something we want to enforce or not. I'm
personally OK with dictating users to use the newer/better version, but
you'll need other people to agree on that before forcing such a change.
--
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>
4:25 p.m.
New subject: Can we bump TP in jbosstools-4.3.x to 4.51.2.Beta1?
We have in the past done updates to JBT / JBDS which *force* users to move
up to a SR1 or SR2 minimum but we've also done LOTS of releases where it
was optional.
So, yes, you need PM (Alexey) and QE (Len) to agree to this change. I
suspect Max will disagree to it.
On Wed, Dec 9, 2015 at 10:04 AM, Mickael Istria <mistria(a)redhat.com> wrote:
On 12/09/2015 03:56 PM, André Dietisheim wrote:
I added org.eclipse.swt 3.104.1 as required plugins to openshift.ui and
express.ui, shouldnt this trigger updated swt to get installed along JBT?
https://github.com/jbosstools/jbosstools-openshift/pull/838
People who're using Mars.0 and installing this OpenShift version will see
a remediation page that will force them to update their whole IDE to Mars.1
(because SWT version is hardcoded in Platform, and using newer SWT implies
using newer Platform).
I don't know if this is something we want to enforce or not. I'm
personally OK with dictating users to use the newer/better version, but
you'll need other people to agree on that before forcing such a change.
--
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
--
Nick Boldt :: JBoss by Red Hat
Productization Lead :: JBoss Tools & Dev Studio
http://nick.divbyzero.com
5:22 p.m.
New subject: Can we bump TP in jbosstools-4.3.x to 4.51.2.Beta1?
-1 to have hard dependencies to Mars.1
If user has Mars.1 then good. It will work fine.
If no, and still using Mars.0 then he/she should update if he wants to
have this bug fix.
IMO this is not critical enough to force users to use Mars.1
On 12/09/2015 10:25 AM, Nick Boldt wrote:
We have in the past done updates to JBT / JBDS which *force* users to
move up to a SR1 or SR2 minimum but we've also done LOTS of releases
where it was optional.
So, yes, you need PM (Alexey) and QE (Len) to agree to this change. I
suspect Max will disagree to it.
On Wed, Dec 9, 2015 at 10:04 AM, Mickael Istria <mistria(a)redhat.com
<mailto:mistria@redhat.com>> wrote:
On 12/09/2015 03:56 PM, André Dietisheim wrote:
> I added org.eclipse.swt 3.104.1 as required plugins to
> openshift.ui and express.ui, shouldnt this trigger updated swt to
> get installed along JBT?
> https://github.com/jbosstools/jbosstools-openshift/pull/838
People who're using Mars.0 and installing this OpenShift version
will see a remediation page that will force them to update their
whole IDE to Mars.1 (because SWT version is hardcoded in Platform,
and using newer SWT implies using newer Platform).
I don't know if this is something we want to enforce or not. I'm
personally OK with dictating users to use the newer/better
version, but you'll need other people to agree on that before
forcing such a change.
--
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 <mailto:jbosstools-dev@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
_______________________________________________
jbosstools-dev mailing list
jbosstools-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbosstools-dev
6:59 p.m.
New subject: Can we bump TP in jbosstools-4.3.x to 4.51.2.Beta1?
I didn't like the Idea of locking JBT release to Specific Service Release
because there was no way for user to understand what is going on when JBoss
Tools update fails with 'encripted' error in install dialog.
Then we got remediation step in that tries to solve the problem and
suggests solutions.
I don't say I like the idea making JBossTools to require specific service
release, but should not we reevaluate it with remediation step in place? How
would that work now? Would it ask to install Eclipse Update? Is it good
workflow for installation/update when some people who doesn't want to
update eclipse have to choose?
On Wed, Dec 9, 2015 at 8:22 AM Alexey Kazakov <alkazako(a)redhat.com> wrote:
-1 to have hard dependencies to Mars.1
If user has Mars.1 then good. It will work fine.
If no, and still using Mars.0 then he/she should update if he wants to
have this bug fix.
IMO this is not critical enough to force users to use Mars.1
On 12/09/2015 10:25 AM, Nick Boldt wrote:
We have in the past done updates to JBT / JBDS which *force* users to move
up to a SR1 or SR2 minimum but we've also done LOTS of releases where it
was optional.
So, yes, you need PM (Alexey) and QE (Len) to agree to this change. I
suspect Max will disagree to it.
On Wed, Dec 9, 2015 at 10:04 AM, Mickael Istria <mistria(a)redhat.com>
wrote:
> On 12/09/2015 03:56 PM, André Dietisheim wrote:
>
> I added org.eclipse.swt 3.104.1 as required plugins to openshift.ui and
> express.ui, shouldnt this trigger updated swt to get installed along JBT?
> https://github.com/jbosstools/jbosstools-openshift/pull/838
>
> People who're using Mars.0 and installing this OpenShift version will see
> a remediation page that will force them to update their whole IDE to Mars.1
> (because SWT version is hardcoded in Platform, and using newer SWT implies
> using newer Platform).
> I don't know if this is something we want to enforce or not. I'm
> personally OK with dictating users to use the newer/better version, but
> you'll need other people to agree on that before forcing such a change.
>
> --
> 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
>
--
Nick Boldt :: JBoss by Red Hat
Productization Lead :: JBoss Tools & Dev Studio
http://nick.divbyzero.com
_______________________________________________
jbosstools-dev mailing
listjbosstools-dev@lists.jboss.orghttps://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbosstools-dev
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email and files attached to it are
confidential. If you are not the intended recipient you are hereby notified
that using, copying, distributing or taking any action in reliance on the
contents of this information is strictly prohibited. If you have received
this email in error please notify the sender and delete this email.
_______________________________________________
jbosstools-dev mailing list
jbosstools-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbosstools-dev
--
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email and files attached to it are
confidential. If you are not the intended recipient you are hereby notified
that using, copying, distributing or taking any action in reliance on the
contents of this information is strictly prohibited. If you have received
this email in error please notify the sender and delete this email.
1:12 p.m.
New subject: Can we bump TP in jbosstools-4.3.x to 4.51.2.Beta1?
On 9 Dec 2015, at 18:59, Denis Golovin wrote:
I didn't like the Idea of locking JBT release to Specific Service
Release
because there was no way for user to understand what is going on when
JBoss
Tools update fails with 'encripted' error in install dialog.
What encrypted error ?
Then we got remediation step in that tries to solve the problem and
suggests solutions.
I don't say I like the idea making JBossTools to require specific
service
release, but should not we reevaluate it with remediation step in
place? How
would that work now? Would it ask to install Eclipse Update? Is it
good
workflow for installation/update when some people who doesn't want to
update eclipse have to choose?
For this specific SWT issue I don't think it is worth it but please
recall that
we added the remediation feature 2 years ago to handle *exactly* this
kind
of issue.
Remember when we did a point release and depended on a SR1 ? We
generated so many
error reports on Marketplace that the foundation was asking us to fix
it asap
or we would be removed from the Marketplace.
That year we did a quick update to revert the version dependency and
then
we funded fixing p2 remediation to allow us to do this.
Thus, if we have *strong* enough reasons (i.e. we believe users are
better of using Mars.1 in all cases
since otherwise his hard drive will be erased or similar) then we have
the option to require .1+.
But it the only issue we have is this SWT issue that can be worked
around in Mars.0 I would say it is not worth
the user impact.
/max
http://about.me/maxandersen
3053
days inactive
3054
days old
jbosstools-dev@lists.jboss.org
4 comments
5 participants
participants (5)
-
Alexey Kazakov -
Denis Golovin -
Max Rydahl Andersen -
Mickael Istria -
Nick Boldt