Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] RC5 ... we are done

Yep, and that's fine. Things happen, but in addition to that part of the 
explanation, it would be nice to know that's really changed since RC4 ... 
is it _really_ required? Your RC4 was probably pretty close to done, 

Again, don't mean to be argumentative (honest, I'm not ... well, most the 
time) ... just trying to clarify what's expected. 

Thanks again, 

Michael Spector <spektom@xxxxxxxxx>
Cross project issues <cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
06/18/2009 01:57 AM
Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] RC5 ... are we done yet? --> "we are done"
Sent by:


Something has changed on the build site that prevents 
us from building PDT.
I'm trying to fix the build site ASAP.

On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 8:52 AM, David M Williams <
david_williams@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Martin, and Michael,

I am sorry but fear I have confused things by forming a question in the
I'm sorry. It was rhetorical.

I should have said "we are done".
We are past the deadline, no one requested a delay.

So, now, if you want an exception, I'd expect you to justify your case.
Explain what is being changed that is of a "stop ship" nature but still
perfectly safe, give bug numbers, etc.
Or ... if your lab caught on fire you can send pictures :) [hey ... it's

Mind you, I have no personal objections (though, it is more work for me)
but in keeping with our
Eclipse release culture, our dates really are written in concrete! :) All
of them ... not just the very final day.
Its much less stressful that way.

We can get out the chisels, if necessary, but the same rules apply to
everyone. You'd have to
convince us that it's necessary to respin and get some support from others
on release train
that it is the right thing to do.

Naturally, the world doesn't end with the release, there's many ways to
provide maintenance, even before SR1, so if you would rather go those
route, feel free to ask questions if something isn't clear.

Again, I'm not saying "no" and don't mean to give you (too hard of) a time
... just want to make up for my mistake in making it seem like an open
question by being extra clear on what's expected.

Thanks, and good luck, I hope it goes smoothly.

Martin Taal <mtaal@xxxxxxxxx>
Cross project issues <cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
06/18/2009 01:14 AM
Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] RC5 ... are we done yet?
Sent by:

And EMF Teneo also has an issue which we discovered yesterday which
impacts the modeling EPP.... I can do a new build today, hopefully in a
few hours or less.

gr. Martin

Michael Spector wrote:
> We have build problems with PDT, so RC5 is not ready yet.
> On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 7:39 AM, David M Williams
> <david_williams@xxxxxxxxxx <mailto:david_williams@xxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
>     Yes, we are. Well, for staging site.
>     Activity is quiet and no one has mentioned being delayed, so
>     assuming we
>     are done.
>     And, just sort of done for sort of a short period of time.
>     If someone really does have a true stop-ship bug, you can post
>     request here for consideration to see if everyone else agrees to
>     re-spin.
>     (remember, it would have to be more than just a bad bug ... but
>     something
>     damaging to users or infrastructure).
>     Now what?
>     I know as we enter final daze
>     (hint, read the document!)
>     many people will eventually (over next week or two, depending on
>     releng processes) want to update your .build file to point to your
>     "permanent" update site, instead of "milestones" or "interim",
>     etc. That's
>     fine, I'll leave builds "on" but these builds will not be pushed to
>     'staging' (staging is done).
>     That's fine, on one condition ... that you still make sure your
>     file is correct and really "builds" ok. That's why we leave the
>     builder
>     active. We need to keep in a state of being able to re-build, in
>     case it
>     is needed for some reason. That's just good releng hygiene. It is
>     harder,
>     with Simultaneous Release, since the build "data" comes from two
>     sources,
>     the .build files (which we could tag, have control over, etc.) but
>     also
>     your own update sites, which totally depends on you and requires
>     you to
>     keep "constant" so we can always re-build, if we had to. And, don't
>     forget, vice-versa ... if/when you change your "milestones"
>     directory to
>     "updates" (or similar) be sure you update your .build file so it
>     will be
>     accurate and continue to build.
>     So, what next, after that?
>     In about a month (or so) we'll start some maintenance efforts for
>     Galileo
>     SR1. At that point you'll update your .build files again (if you
>     maintenance) and provide an interim maintenance update site to
>     pull from.
>     But please do not modify your .build files for maintenance until
>     instructed ... just to make sure we are all ready and know what's
>     going
>     on.
>     As always, if questions, issues, or you need something special,
>     just ask
>     (here on cross-project list).
>     _______________________________________________
>     cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
>     cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
>     <mailto:cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
> cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx


With Regards, Martin Taal

Office: Hardwareweg 4, 3821 BV Amersfoort
Postal: Nassaulaan 7, 3941 EC Doorn
The Netherlands
Cell: +31 (0)6 288 48 943
Tel: +31 (0)84 420 2397
Fax: +31 (0)84 225 9307
Mail: mtaal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx - mtaal@xxxxxxxxx
Web: -

cross-project-issues-dev mailing list

cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
cross-project-issues-dev mailing list

Back to the top