Given Martin's comments, I'm happy to
send the exception request on your behalf. But, would like some help polishing
it up. Below is the first draft of my note to PC.
First, I was wondering if you had a
website, or wiki page that I could include. I just see the TmL one.
If not, fine ... its not required, no
need to wait for that ... I thought it'd be good to include it, was surprised
I couldn't find it, and thought maybe I was just missing it.
I looked under http://www.eclipse.org/dsdp/
If not one, should I include the TmL one? Would that be helpful for others
learning about Sequoyah?
If that's no good, maybe I could include
a link to Project Proposal?
Second, more important, is that I'd
like to include a "business case" for making the exception. What
I mean by that, are reasons why this is important to Eclipse, as a whole,
not just your specific project.
Some (brief) good cases might be "Is
part of a key Eclipse Strategy", "Is required by an adopter that
is an Eclipse Member", "there are other projects in Helios that
require it". Anything like that? If not,
we'll go with what we have ... but,
thought I'd ask.
I'm sure some of these answers are obvious
to you, so apologies for not knowing more about your project ... but normally
my ignorance works to my advantage. :)
I'm sending this note on behalf of the
DSDP-PMC, since they are still in the process of picking a successor for
Doug Gaff to represent them on the Planning Council.
Sequoyah is a re-packaging and expansion
of the Project previously known as TmL. TmL was in Galileo, but with all
the transition and transformation into Sequoyah their builds were not ready
Eric Cloninger kept me informed of their
status and outlook since December of last year, so this isn't as "last
minute" as it might appear. Its been known for a while, plans in place,
etc. and if anything, their lack of a representative these past few months
is the reason for no earlier communication to the council (not, anything
to do with the Project itself).
As I have stated before, I would like
to abstain from these Exception Votes, to make sure you, the Planning Council,
are fully on board, take responsibility for the content of the Simultaneous
Release, and avoid your tendency just to do as I say (ha ha). So, I'll
be looking for 3 +1 votes to consider this "approved". Please
indicate your approval, or not, by a response to this planning council
list. (Since a full one week delay would interfere with getting M5 done,
I've told Eric he can take steps to get in the build, as long as he is
willing to revert, if it turns out there are objections).