|
I agree with you.
Project have a many way to release as you said.
I don't think the train
release is must.
So, I am glad if the community tolerate revival of NAB.
Shigeki
Fri, 04 Jul 2008 08:38:27 -0400
I
don't believe that we should add significant new chunks of function at a
service release.
Doug's comments are right on here IMHO. The
train is interesting but it is not the only way that projects can release
things. There are many projects at Eclipse that release at other times
than many many products and projects not at Eclipse that do not participate in
the train at all. Imagining that the only way to get stuff from Eclipse
is through a once-a-year monolithic release is directly counter to the Eclipse
fundamentals of componentization and extensible platforms. If missing
the train by a few days or process elements is so damning to a project then
perhaps we should be considering improvements in the way the community
discovers and consumes projects.
Jeff
Shigeki Moride wrote:
Hello Nick and all
I apologize for my wording.
So, I'd like to say clearly.
I understand difficulty of re-spin the Ganymede release at now. So, I'm
OK with withdrawing my request to re-release. If possible, could you add
me to the train at Service Release?. Can we discuss this?
PS.
I think, It was a good experience to paticipate in Ganymede.
Shigeki
Thu, 3 Jul 2008 16:29:25 -0400
John Arthorne <John_Arthorne@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
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窶冱 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窶冱 not fair to Shigeki, and it窶冱 not correct.
That being said, given that NAB is only missing on the update site and everything else is good, I窶冦 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窶冲 be included on eclipse.org (GPL issues), even the packages don窶冲 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 窶��if it窶冱 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窶冤l 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
<mailto:cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
mailing list as well as the
<mailto:eclipse.org-planning-council@xxxxxxxxxxx>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窶决e not already subscribed:
<https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse.org-planning-council>https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse.org-planning-council
I think it may be too late, but let窶冱 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窶冱 really time for you to make the case on the list and explain why you didn窶冲 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@xxxxxxx.fujitsu.com_______________________________________________
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
--
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
--
Shigeki Moride
|
