| <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd"> |
| <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"> |
| <head> |
| <title>Software Repository Reports</title> |
| <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1" /> |
| <meta name="author" content="Eclipse Foundation, Inc." /> |
| <link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" |
| href="/eclipse/eclipse.org-common/stylesheets/visual.css" |
| media="screen" /> |
| <link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" |
| href="/eclipse/eclipse.org-common/stylesheets/layout.css" |
| media="screen" /> |
| </head> |
| <body> |
| <div id="header"> |
| <a href="http://www.eclipse.org/"><img |
| src="/eclipse/eclipse.org-common/stylesheets/header_logo.gif" |
| width="163" height="68" border="0" alt="Eclipse Logo" |
| class="logo" /> </a> |
| </div> |
| <div id="midcolumn"> |
| |
| <h1>Software Repository Reports</h1> |
| |
| <p> |
| <strong> The "signing test" is still running </strong> (or |
| ended abnormally) and it takes a long time. Check back in a |
| few hours, or monitor the <a |
| href="https://hudson.eclipse.org/hudson/view/Repository%20Aggregation/">Repository |
| Aggregation build.</a> |
| </p> |
| |
| <p> |
| The reports are listed in approximate order of priority. |
| Such as, bundles must not have missing legal files, and all |
| bundles need to be signed (with few exceptions), and all |
| bundles must use 4 part version numbers. The remaining |
| reports are important, and ideally would be "clean", but |
| normally would not prevent the release, or inclusion in the |
| common repository. Except where noted, the checks are done |
| directly are jars in the main common repository directories. |
| That is, it does not check the "trusted repositories" we |
| point to via composite indirection. See the <a |
| href="http://wiki.eclipse.org/SimRel/Simultaneous_Release_Reports_FAQ"> |
| Reports FAQ</a> for more information about the code that |
| generates the reports. |
| |
| </p> |
| <p>Remember, these automated reports test a minimal view of |
| the repository. For example, a bundle may have an about.html |
| file, so is not listed in "missing files" report, but that |
| does not mean the content of the about.html file is correct. |
| In other words, Committers and Project Leads are still |
| responsible for correctness -- these reports are more |
| focused on obvious incorrectness, usually things that happen |
| by small oversights, and which are often hard to "spot" |
| until too late. Note too that many of the "errors" these |
| reports list, can be caught at development time, in Eclipse |
| IDE, by proper setting of PDE compiler settings.</p> |
| <p>Also, remember, especially since these reports are "new" |
| in this context, the reports may contain out-right errors |
| and will certainly need improvement over time. Contributions |
| welcome. Please open a bug in cross-project component if you |
| see problems or have new contributions.</p> |
| <dl> |
| <dt> |
| <a href="reports/layoutCheck.txt">Bundles missing |
| required files</a> |
| </dt> |
| <dd>This report lists bundles and features that are |
| missing important, required files. It looks directly at |
| jars in the common repository. (Currently, does not |
| check those "trusted repositories" we point to via |
| composite indirection). Missing legal files are usually |
| considered a "stop ship" issue, since Eclipse is well |
| known for its IP quality.</dd> |
| <dt>Unsigned bundles</dt> |
| <dd>(pending)</dd> |
| <dt> |
| <a href="reports/versionPatternCheck.txt">Bundles |
| and Features not using 4 part versions</a> |
| </dt> |
| <dd>To have p2 update correctly and OSGi to resolve |
| bundles as expected, it is essential that bundles and |
| features use the required 4 part versioning rules. Every |
| build.</dd> |
| <dt> |
| <a href="reports/licenseConsistency.html">Consistent, |
| current licenses (SUA) in features</a> |
| </dt> |
| <dd>Check to make sure features use the current, |
| correct license. The report also lists features in |
| repository with no license (SUA) in the content |
| metadata. This report uses the repository's content |
| metadata, instead of the jar files themselves, in |
| contrast to the "missing files" report, above. Both are |
| important to be correct, as different parts of Eclipse |
| code use one or the other to present information to the |
| user depending on the task.</dd> |
| <dt> |
| <a href="reports/breedata.txt">Use and Distribution |
| of Bundle-RequiredExecutionEnvironment</a> |
| </dt> |
| <dd>Interesting report showing what BREEs are in use, |
| and which bundles are missing it. All bundles with Java |
| code should have one, but it is not required in |
| resource-only bundles.</dd> |
| <dt> |
| <a href="reports/pack200data.txt">Jars missing |
| corresponding Pack200 file</a> |
| </dt> |
| <dd>Pack200 compression is important to save bandwidth. |
| This report will never be perfect ... that is, there are |
| cases where it is known that a jar can not be cleanly |
| compressed with pack200. But nearly all can. So one or |
| two from a project should be ignored as "OK" ... but a |
| pattern of all jars/bundles from a project not being |
| compressed indicates the project simply has not |
| implemented that yet in their build or contribution |
| process.</dd> |
| <dt> |
| <a href="reports/featureNames.html">Feature names |
| report</a> |
| </dt> |
| |
| <dd>Check this report for features using incorrect |
| names or incorrect localization settings. While we can |
| not automatically know what the correct name of a bundle |
| is, we can be sure it does not start with '%', and is |
| not "Feature-Name" or "feature", etc. This test is ran |
| against the content metadata of the repository.</dd> |
| <dt> |
| <a href="reports/bundleNames.html">Bundle names |
| report</a> |
| </dt> |
| |
| <dd>Check this report for bundles using incorrect names |
| or incorrect localization settings. While we can not |
| automatically know what the correct name of a bundle is, |
| we can be sure it does not start with '%', and is not |
| "Bundle-Name" or "plugin-name", etc. This test is ran |
| against the content metadata of the repository.</dd> |
| <dt> |
| <a href="reports/providerNames.html">Provider name |
| report</a> |
| </dt> |
| <dd>Check for bundles using incorrect provider names |
| (Bundle-Vendor directive) or incorrect localization |
| settings. The best form of provider name is "Eclipse |
| <project name>". Some projects have chosen a |
| slightly different form, and can not automate every name |
| check, but, again, we know it should not start with '%', |
| not be "provider-name" nor be empty (null). This test is |
| ran against the content metadata of the repository.</dd> |
| |
| |
| <dt> |
| <a href="reports/copyrights.html">Feature Copyrights</a> |
| </dt> |
| |
| <dd>List copyrights used by Features.</dd> |
| |
| <dt> |
| <a href="reports/descriptions.html">Feature |
| Descriptions</a> |
| </dt> |
| |
| <dd>List descriptions used by Features.</dd> |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| <dt> |
| <a href="reports/nonUniqueVersions.txt">List of |
| non-unique versions</a> |
| </dt> |
| <dd>List those bundles (technically, IUs) for which |
| there are multiple versions. It is often quite normal |
| for there to be multiple versions (e.g. when differ by |
| major or minor versions), but sometimes looking at the |
| multiple version report can spot unexpected cases where |
| there are multiple versions. Even if so, it will usually |
| not cause problems, but can at least be inefficient use |
| of space (e.g. if differ only by qualifier).</dd> |
| |
| <dt> |
| <a href="reports/versionPatterns.txt">Version |
| Qualifer Patterns</a> |
| </dt> |
| <dd>This is an exploratory report of the the types or |
| patterns of version qualifers by bundles and features in |
| the repository. Longer term, this report can be improved |
| to spot typos and also find bundles or features in the |
| repository that do not use 4 part versioning. (A report, |
| above, also detects lack of 4 part versioning, but is |
| based on jars, found in common directory, rather than |
| all of content metadata in repository.)</dd> |
| <dt> |
| <a href="reports/esdata.txt">Use of |
| Eclipse-SourceReferences</a> |
| </dt> |
| <dd> |
| List those bundles which are, and which are not, using |
| the <a |
| href="http://wiki.eclipse.org/PDE/UI/SourceReferences">Eclipse-SourceReferences</a> |
| directive and the value of that directive. This |
| directive (and report) is useful for some projects to |
| help their community find their source code directly |
| from their repository (to help make providing patches |
| easier), but is not useful or appropriate for all |
| projects. Use the directive, and the report, however |
| your project deems appropriate and useful. |
| </dd> |
| <dt> |
| <a href="reports/featureDirectoryLengths.html">Feature |
| Directory Lengths</a> |
| </dt> |
| <dd>This is an exploratory report of the length of |
| feature directories length, if feature was installed, |
| (not including the .../eclipse/features part of name). |
| Its purpose it to alert the interested of exceptionally |
| long feature names, which might cause some issues on |
| some operating systems. This report is exploratory, |
| since it is unclear what, if any, should be considered |
| the maximum length, which depends on many factors. But |
| ... if you are creating new features, it'd be best not |
| to exceed the typical sizes.</dd> |
| |
| <dt>Signed bundles exceptions</dt> |
| <dd>(pending)</dd> |
| <dt>Correctly signed bundles</dt> |
| <dd>(pending)</dd> |
| </dl> |
| </div> |
| </body> |
| </html> |
