Skip to main content

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

Just to eliminate any misunderstanding... PDT was tagged yesterday (06/17/2009) as it was planned by "code freeze" date. 
The only issue is in building it :)

On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 9:06 AM, Martin Taal <mtaal@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi David,
It is this issue:
Apparently a big ugly :-( button shows up in the modeling EPP Eclipse installation because of a Teneo plugin. So we want to remove this button as it is a strange thing to have in a final release. I feel a bit akward by this clumsy issue....:-( as it does not break anything but it is not a good thing to have in a final release. I can't see that removing this button would break anything else.

And as PDT also needs an extra build, maybe we can tag along...

gr. Martin

Michael Spector wrote:

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 <mailto: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
   Explain what is being changed that is of a "stop ship" nature but
   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 <mailto: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>
   <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
   >     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 <mailto:mtaal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> -
   mtaal@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:mtaal@xxxxxxxxx>
   Web: <> - <>

   cross-project-issues-dev mailing list

   cross-project-issues-dev mailing list


cross-project-issues-dev mailing list


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

Back to the top