What Repos are considered for generating the Acknowledgement Page`

As far as I understand .github/workflows/generateAcknowledgements.yml does generate the Acknowledgement Page for the releases (e.g. https://eclipse.dev/eclipse/markdown/?f=news/4.39/acknowledgements.md).

Which repos are taken into account?

I would propose to also include changes to the https://github.com/eclipse-platform/ui-best-practices.

It's done via https://github.com/eclipse-platform/www.eclipse.org-eclipse/blob/master/.github/workflows/generateAcknowledgements.yml IIRC

So the list of repos is basically in https://github.com/eclipse-platform/eclipse.platform.releng.aggregator/blob/master/.gitmodules

Can we simply add the https://github.com/eclipse-platform/ui-best-practices repo there?

Should be possible. One can try to modify in his own fork and figure it out.

Should I propose a PR?

Yes, please. If a repo is part of the project we should acknowledge contributions to it.

Add ui-best-practices to submodules

Yes, please. If a repo is part of the project we should acknowledge contributions to it.

Done.

I have closed the PR as having it this repo cloned everytime/place where releng.aggregator is -is way too wasteful. Please adjust the GHA instead.

@BeckerWdf

I have closed the PR as having it this repo cloned everytime/place where releng.aggregator is -is way too wasteful. Please adjust the GHA instead.

Just to repeat my answer form that PR:
Instead the acknowledgement-workflow should be adjusted to consider that repository too.
Or it should be reworked to just traverse all active repositories of the known eclipse top-level organizations.

The later could even make the 'collection' part of the workflow simpler.
@BeckerWdf do you want to have a look at that or do you need help?

@BeckerWdf

I have closed the PR as having it this repo cloned everytime/place where releng.aggregator is -is way too wasteful. Please adjust the GHA instead.

Just to repeat my answer form that PR:
Instead the acknowledgement-workflow should be adjusted to consider that repository too.
Or it should be reworked to just traverse all active repositories of the known eclipse top-level organizations.

The later could even make the 'collection' part of the workflow simpler.
@BeckerWdf do you want to have a look at that or do you need help?

I'm not totally sure it makes sense... As Tycho is "contributing" to the release as well, should it be listed then consequently also? What about EMF, ECF, Orbit, JustJ, ...? Maybe Maven, Adoptium, ...? What about JUnit and similar 3rd party dep?

So I would say, if an icon is changed, and the user push it to the repo it will be show on the page as-is. If we absolutely want that a static acknowledgement like for the it infra staff seems more suitable to me and then we should make this list even longer (see above).

The later could even make the 'collection' part of the workflow simpler.
@BeckerWdf do you want to have a look at that or do you need help?

I think I don't have the knowledge to do that. So help would be needed.

I'm not totally sure it makes sense... As Tycho is "contributing" to the release as well, should it be listed then consequently also?

This is a different question. The repo mentioned by me is a part of the platform project. And why should be not acknowledge contributions to it. Are contributions only important if the find their way into the binary we deliver directly?

And why should be not acknowledge contributions to it. Are contributions only important if the find their way into the binary we deliver directly?

We already have a general contribution section here:

We would also like to thank the users and adopters who support our efforts through a range of activities, including early testing, being a Friend of Eclipse, contracting special work, or outright employment.

A special thanks goes to Holger Voormann for his Eclipse IDE promotion videos.

Another special thanks to other Eclipse projects we build upon: EMF and ECF, who also provide timely updates so we can release on time. We also thank the other Eclipse projects that make up part of the infrastructure we depend on: Tycho, Orbit, EGit, EMF, and ECF for providing fixes and steady improvements.

that's what I mention above, we already acknowledge that we depend on more things (and appreciate this) but we do not list this individually!

So of course every contribution is important, but I question it makes sense for the ui-best-practices that actually

The repo mentioned by me is a part of the platform project

but only for technical reasons as before it was an own repo but is of course also for other Eclipse Projects (e.g. m2e, wtp, php...)

So even though its possible, I'm not sure its actually useful... following the argumentation we also need to list individually

just because they are technically part of the github organization...

@akurtakov

So of course every contribution is important, but I question it makes sense for the ui-best-practices

What the opinion of the other committers like @akurtakov @HannesWell or @merks on this question?

I am in favor of considering the ui-best-practices for the acknowledgements. UI/UX is an important topic and having proper common guidelines for it is accordingly important. Probably not that many are well aware of the ui-best-practices or don't have a look often enough (including me), maybe also because of lacking maintenance.

Not including that repo in the acknowledgements would send the implicit message that we don't care about contributions to UI/UX best practices.

I am in favor of considering the ui-best-practices for the acknowledgements. UI/UX is an important topic and having proper common guidelines for it is accordingly important

So you proposing adding it as an extra category then?

Not including that repo in the acknowledgements would send the implicit message that we don't care about contributions to UI/UX best practices.

So consequently you want to say we do not care about contributions to the website/N&N, the aggregator build the general github page and guidelines as well as the overall github configuration right? ;-)

Just to make it clear, I won't mind showing some more images on that page, but as far as I can see people are contributing to the other repos anyways and are already on the list. From technical point of view, we then need to make sure that all branches and tags are also created for the ui-best practices repo (maybe including milestones!).

So consequently you want to say we do not care about contributions to the website/N&N, the aggregator build the general github page and guidelines as well as the overall github configuration right? ;-)

No, I have not mentioned that I want to exclude them. Actually, I would just include all of them. Why should one contribution count more than another? Where to draw the line? If there are repos to which contributions are not valuable to acknowledge, we should not have that repository at all.

"ui-best-practices" is a misleading name based on the activity in it lately - shaping icons and iconpacks .
My view is pretty clear - it should be included as long as:

repo is part of the eclipse-platform GH org
"acknowledgement" page is generated

I have many personal views/questions like:

Is "acknowledgement" page really needed? https://projects.eclipse.org/projects/eclipse.platform/who and similar serve the purpose for me better. Admitting that historical data is not shown but do anyone need it and look at it for old releases? Isn't it duplicated info with contributors section with N&N?
Is there some plan for all the icons that get into this repo? It would be nice such information to be shared with the community for better understanding why this work is important in general.

As I don't have the time to pursue any of these - please take it only as food for thought and if you really care about some of the topics and can spend the time on it - I would be more than happy to follow up on dedicated items (just add me to them).

If a repo is part of the project we should acknowledge contributions to it.

I agree with that.

@akurtakov

"ui-best-practices" is a misleading name based on the activity in it lately - shaping icons and iconpacks .

I mentioned this several times but was somewhat "overruled" by others in this regards (what is of course okay). Please note that we already have a real webpage for this here https://eclipse-platform.github.io/ui-best-practices/ so that would be a much better place for individual acknowledgments (if not the usual contributors feels enough).

If a repo is part of the project we should acknowledge contributions to it.

I agree with that.

My main point is I do not see that we do not acknowledge contributions to it... so I don't se what exactly it buys us to make this page (maybe!) a bit longer, but if it makes people feel "better" why not.

I contribute to any repository of software I like because I want to make the software better not to appear on whatever "list of acknowledgements" and merging/releasing my contributions is enough of acknowledgement (for me)! So I mostly agree to @akurtakov first point here.

I contribute to any repository of software I like because I want to make the software better not to appear on whatever "list of acknowledgements" and merging/releasing my contributions is enough of acknowledgement (for me)!

I assume that's the primary motivation of all of us, still some are happy to get public acknowledgement for their contribution in a more explicit form. And if it helps to motivate (at least some) contributors to do more, I'm all for it. And all reports I got about this page were in that direction.
But I think we don't discuss the acknowledgements in general but just if the ui-best-practices repo should be added. And since it's content influences the platform/IDE' appearance and it's part of the project I also think it should be considered for the acknowledgements. In general I think all repos of an organization should be considered, maybe with the exception of the .github and .eclipsefdn as they are just organizational.

And as it was said, it will probably make the list of acknowledged people at most only a little longer, so for me this isn't a big discussion item.

@HannesWell

A agree with what @HannesWell says.

Consider all active repositories for acknowledgements

Navigation Menu

Repository navigation

What Repos are considered for generating the Acknowledgement Page` #485

Metadata

Assignees

Labels

Type

Projects

Milestone

Relationships

Development

What Repos are considered for generating the Acknowledgement Page` #485

Description

Activity

akurtakov commented on Feb 5, 2026

BeckerWdf commented on Feb 5, 2026

akurtakov commented on Feb 5, 2026

BeckerWdf commented on Feb 5, 2026

akurtakov commented on Feb 5, 2026

BeckerWdf commented on Feb 5, 2026

akurtakov commented on Feb 5, 2026

HannesWell commented on Feb 5, 2026

HannesWell commented on Feb 5, 2026

laeubi commented on Feb 5, 2026

BeckerWdf commented on Feb 5, 2026

BeckerWdf commented on Feb 5, 2026

laeubi commented on Feb 5, 2026

BeckerWdf commented on Feb 6, 2026

HeikoKlare commented on Feb 6, 2026

laeubi commented on Feb 6, 2026

HeikoKlare commented on Feb 6, 2026

akurtakov commented on Feb 6, 2026

iloveeclipse commented on Feb 6, 2026

laeubi commented on Feb 6, 2026

HannesWell commented on Feb 9, 2026

BeckerWdf commented on Feb 10, 2026

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

Labels

Type

Projects

Milestone

Relationships

Development

Issue actions