|
| Re: WTP 1.0 GA announced [message #153582 is a reply to message #153512] |
Fri, 23 December 2005 16:51   |
Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Tim Wagner wrote:
> December 23, 2005
> WTP 1.0 GA Release Now Available
>
> The WTP team promoted release candidate 5 (“RC5”) to final GA status
> today. There are no code changes from RC5, but the GA build was redone
> in order to ensure that labels, checksums, etc. were all consistent.
>
> You can download the 1.0 GA version directly from
> http://download.eclipse.org/webtools/downloads/drops/R-1.0-2 00512210855/
> or via the general downloads page:
> http://download.eclipse.org/webtools/downloads/. Release notes and a
> list of known problems may be found at
> http://eclipse.org/webtools/releases/1.0/release-notes.html.
>
> We are currently updating our website to reflect the 1.0 release, so
> please follow the links above until these changes are completed.
>
> The download page contains WTP (in normal and SDK forms) as well as
> links to the correct versions of prerequisite projects; an integrated
> ZIP will be available shortly. The download manager site will be updated
> with the 1.0 release bits in early January.
Sorry to rant here, I know everyone is eager to celebrate
christmas and be done with it, but is this a wise decision, given all
the problems people seem to have with RC5 (deployment on tomcat having
problems, same goes for the speed where a regression bug has been
reintroduced)
I am not sure if a push towards a mid January date would not have been
wiser, given those bugs were a small number but almost showstoppers for
some.
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: WTP 1.0 GA announced [message #154668 is a reply to message #153582] |
Tue, 03 January 2006 16:38 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
This perf regression and other high priority defects will be corrected
ASAP and made available in weekly M-builds. These builds should be
stable and will hopefully enable anyone stuck on deployment or similar
problems to make progress in advance of the mid-February service pack
(1.0.1), which will roll up a number of fixes for serious issues,
including this perf problem.
The competing demands of wanting to fix all the high priority issues
prior to declaring a release while still staying on a predictable
release cycle are always hard to manage, and perhaps we made the wrong
decision in this case. We try to gauge the impact to the community of
waiting versus proceeding with known problems; in this case, we're also
trying to join the 3.2 ("Callisto") release train, so placing 2006 dates
in jeopardy also poses problems for our user and adopter base. I hope
next week's M-build will contain the patch for this perf regression, and
that it will be an effective stopgap for you and others who've
experienced the problem.
Werner Punz wrote:
>
> Sorry to rant here, I know everyone is eager to celebrate
> christmas and be done with it, but is this a wise decision, given all
> the problems people seem to have with RC5 (deployment on tomcat having
> problems, same goes for the speed where a regression bug has been
> reintroduced)
>
> I am not sure if a push towards a mid January date would not have been
> wiser, given those bugs were a small number but almost showstoppers for
> some.
|
|
|
Powered by
FUDForum. Page generated in 0.04277 seconds
Home