[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
RE: [cross-project-issues-dev] Re: NAB
|
I was just using Shigeki's own words
in his email from today which were requesting to "join the Ganymede
train". Without that Ganymede site connection, I suppose it's just
a project releasing on the same day. As you suggest, this is nearly as
good and doesn't need planning council consensus.
John
"Gaff, Doug"
<doug.gaff@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent by: cross-project-issues-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
07/03/2008 03:57 PM
Please respond to
Cross project issues <cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
|
To
| "Cross project issues" <cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>,
"eclipse.org-planning-council" <eclipse.org-planning-council@xxxxxxxxxxx>
|
cc
|
|
Subject
| RE: [cross-project-issues-dev] Re: NAB |
|
John, I disagree.
Being on the train means
doing all the must do’s from Ganymede, not just being on the update
site. As Nick and Martin have pointed out, NAB has done everything but
the .sc file: milestones, signing, packing, iplog, about files, legal review,
release review, etc. We need to stop saying NAB was never on the train.
It’s not fair to Shigeki, and it’s not correct.
That being said, given that
NAB is only missing on the update site and everything else is good, I’m
beginning to lose interest in this discussion. I think the packages are
more useful than the update site anyway. And since most of the projects
in DSDP need additional tooling that can’t be included on eclipse.org
(GPL issues), even the packages don’t help us that much. We are starting
an off-site packaging initiative to address this.
So, I commend Shigeki for
struggling through the difficult language barrier and doing the Ganymede
work.
Shigeki – if it’s ok with
you, I suggest we just not worry about the update site anymore. I suggest
you ask Bjorn to rerun the build so you can test your .sc file in the staging
area. We can leave it at that.
Doug G
From: cross-project-issues-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:cross-project-issues-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of John
Arthorne
Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2008 3:08 PM
To: Cross project issues
Subject: Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Re: NAB
I guess it's up to the planning council, but this case looks pretty clear.
From what I understand, the project *never* joined the train (hooked
into the Ganymede site) for any milestone or release candidate build and
nobody noticed until after the final release date. Clearly there was also
no testing of installing the NAB bits from the Ganymede site, and due to
its absence it missed various verification tests that David and others
performed on the Ganymede repository. You're about six months too late
to join Ganymede, but on the bright side you're ready six months early
for the Io release train.
John
Shigeki Moride <moride@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent by: cross-project-issues-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
07/03/2008 09:02 AM
Please respond to
Cross project issues <cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
|
To
| "Cross project issues"
<cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
|
cc
|
|
Subject
| [cross-project-issues-dev] Re: NAB |
|
Hi all
I talked with Doug and Martin. I forward this discussion to here.
So, if the Ganymede gate isn't closed now then I want to join to Ganymede
train.
And I apologize this lazy boarding and my poor English skill.
Shigeki
Thu, 3 Jul 2008 05:21:16 -0700
"Gaff, Doug" <doug.gaff@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Thanks Martin. I forgot that the planning council list was closed. Shigeki,
if you post to cross-projects, I’ll forward a copy to the planning council
to expedite this.
From: Oberhuber, Martin
Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2008 8:13 AM
To: Gaff, Doug; 'Shigeki Moride'
Subject: RE: NAB
Hi Shigeki,
please post to the
cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
mailing list as well as the
eclipse.org-planning-council@xxxxxxxxxxx
mailing list.
I know that you are subscribed
to cross-project, but I am not
100% sure if you are also subscribed
to planning-council.
The planning council list is a
"closed" one where you need
to ask the EMO by means of an E-Mail
to get subscribed --
you cannot subscribe yourself there.
Cheers,
--
Martin Oberhuber, Senior
Member of Technical Staff, Wind
River
Target Management Project Lead,
DSDP PMC Member
http://www.eclipse.org/dsdp/tm
From: Gaff, Doug
Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2008 2:10 PM
To: Shigeki Moride
Cc: Oberhuber, Martin
Subject: RE: NAB
Can you post this to eclipse.org-planning-council
today? You can subscribe here if you’re not already subscribed:
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse.org-planning-council
I think it may be too late,
but let’s see.
From: moride.shigeki@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:moride.shigeki@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Shigeki Moride
Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2008 9:45 PM
To: Gaff, Doug
Subject: Re: NAB
Doug
Sorry, yesterday was a holiday.
Firstly, eclipse.org-planning-council
ML is not feeding for me.
So, I think the reason of this fact.
1) I couldn't understand the meaning
of Ganymede Must Do #10. I understand that term as about Ganymede Signoff
page on wiki. Is there any pointer to the issue of *.sc file?
2) I seem Ganymede Build page is
only described "automatic build". I couldn't find the necessity
to making *.sc file to the project that have a builded packages.
3) I feel relief at the passage
of the release review.
4) Generally, if that issue was
announced on cross-project-issues-dev or other ML then it is too difficult
to find it. Because that ML have too much traffic to read all for non-native
English reader. I'm sorry about this but this is a fact. I need help to
tracking that discussion. Please give me a head-up information.
Shigeki
Tue, 1 Jul 2008 06:44:58 -0700
"Gaff, Doug" <doug.gaff@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Hi Shigeki,
Are you following
the discussion on the eclipse.org-planning-council mailing list? Martin
and I have advocated that you be added to the Ganymede release. But it’s
really time for you to make the case on the list and explain why you didn’t
understand the instructions.
Doug
From: Oberhuber, Martin
Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2008 9:26 AM
To: Gaff, Doug
Subject: RE: NAB
Importance: High
Hi Doug,
I think that Shigeki should have
the final word on this. It doesn't seem
right that we fight for his project,
and he doesn't even care about sending
a single e-mail to the cross-project
list. I think he must have the final
word of either
(a) explaining why he didn't
understand the instructions, and asking for
his
project to be picked up, or
(b) withdrawing the request.
After all it's his project and
we're just mentoring it, right? My personal
opinion (and that's for Doug S,
Nick and Bjorn) is that while it seems
absolutely obvious for us build+releng
guys that creating a *.sc file is
required for the Ganymatic, it's
not that obvious for somebody just reading
the "must do's". The
original text, already cited by Nick, is:
"Projects must have stated and demonstrated their intent to join Ganymede
by the M4+0 date. Projects do so by adding themselves to the table/list
above and to the Ganymede common build infrastructure. " (http://wiki.eclipse.org/Ganymede#Must_Do,
#10)
So, Shigeki did add himself to the list, but what the heck would that
... and to the Ganymede build infrastructure"
mean?
I agree that SHigeki can't have
been too keen about joining Ganymede
but it might also be a cultural
question.
However, I think he should have
the final word, and not you.
Cheers,
--
Martin Oberhuber, Senior
Member of Technical Staff, Wind
River
Target Management Project Lead,
DSDP PMC Member
http://www.eclipse.org/dsdp/tm
--
Shigeki Moride
moride.shigeki@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
moride@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
--
Shigeki Moride
moride.shigeki@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
moride@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx_______________________________________________
cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev_______________________________________________
cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev