Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
RE: [cross-project-issues-dev] Bjorn "Knuckles" the Ganymede Enforcerasks a question about STP...

Title: New Page 1
I'll be one of the first to stand up and thank Oisin for his great work in the community. And he's a great guy to boot.
But this is the point we've all been dreading. Do we have the, well, you know, to vote projects off the island for breaking the rules? STP has a pretty long history of breaking builds and missing deadlines. If these events were in isolation, then I'd say let it go. But they are not. In fact, we probably should have brought this up when they missed the release review deadline.
Before casting my vote, I'd like to hear from the STP project what their action plan is to resolve these issues. I may be alone here, but I don't really care if they sign and pack their jars, and i'm sure they can fix their feature files in time. But if I don't get a sense that these issues are going to stop, then I would have to vote to remove them.

From: cross-project-issues-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:cross-project-issues-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Bjorn Freeman-Benson
Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2008 12:37 PM
To: Cross project issues;
Subject: [cross-project-issues-dev] Bjorn "Knuckles" the Ganymede Enforcerasks a question about STP...

Given that:
  1. STP has bad data in their feature files:
  2. STP doesn't yet sign or pack their jars (information from today's release review call)
    1. See items 13, 14
It almost seems like, that STP does not qualify under item 2 "have a mature build process". We're 12 days from the 'final released bits' date and 2 days from the 'final build date' and STP doesn't have a good build that conforms to the must dos and "plays well with others".

Are we going to vote them off the island?
- Bjorn

P.S. I really regret being the "heavy" here because I know that Oisin and the STP team are nice people, they are well intentioned, they are trying hard, but the facts are what the facts are.
[end of message]

Back to the top