Skip to main content
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [eclipse.org-architecture-council] Agenda for Thursday Meeting 
Hi Cedric,

Just to avoid any confusion, the meeting is tomorrow, right?
And yes, I'll attend.

Cheers,
Sven

On May 13, 2009, at 3:53 PM, Cédric Brun wrote:


Hi Martin,

I talked about that to Ed, Sven should be at the meeting today too,
that will make 2 backup representations for the overall Modeling project. 
That said, I'm not sure that's official as long as Ed did not stated
anything on a public channel.

Cédric

Oberhuber, Martin a écrit :

Thanks Gunnar,

I added this as an item for our monthly meeting on Thursday.
http://wiki.eclipse.org/Architecture_Council/Meetings/May_14_2009

The 2nd item for Thursday is API Deprecation: I'd like to
encourage all AC members read up on that topic as a base
for discussion.
https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=261544

Feel free to add other items to the agenda.

I know I've still got the action item for documenting bugzilla
best practices from our last meeting on the Wiki -- will do
until Thursday.

Cedric, and Tom: Have you talked to your respective PMC's about
making your representation official?

Talk you on Thursday,

Cheers,
--
Martin Oberhuber, Senior Member of Technical Staff, Wind River
Target Management Project Lead, DSDP PMC Member
http://www.eclipse.org/dsdp/tm





-----Original Message-----
From: eclipse.org-architecture-council-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:eclipse.org-architecture-council-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Gunnar Wagenknecht
Sent: Montag, 11. Mai 2009 20:06
To: eclipse.org-architecture-council@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [eclipse.org-architecture-council] Re: Eclipse
Repository BestPractices

Hi AC,

Bug 249745 ([1], Eclipse Repository Best Practices) is
currently marked
as a blocker for bug 257706 ([2], Host a git repository...). I wonder 
what the status here is.
I also wonder if we as the AC should put this onto our agenda and come 
to a conclusion as this one. I can see two solutions:

(A) Recommend X as the new SCM and recommend deprecating Y and Z.
(B) Don't do anything but keep Y and Z.
Both would require formalizing a statement and putting the bug into a RESOLVED state. Based on this, the blocking issue could be addressed. 

Note, I'm not saying that our decision has to be final. I'd
see it as a
signal to people telling them that we are actually moving
forward (a bit).

-Gunnar

[1] https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=249745
[2] https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=257706

--
Gunnar Wagenknecht
gunnar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://wagenknecht.org/
_______________________________________________
eclipse.org-architecture-council mailing list
eclipse.org-architecture-council@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse.org-architect
ure-council

IMPORTANT: Membership in this list is generated by processes
internal to the Eclipse Foundation.  To be permanently
removed from this list, you must contact emo@xxxxxxxxxxx to
request removal.



_______________________________________________
eclipse.org-architecture-council mailing list
eclipse.org-architecture-council@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse.org-architecture-council
IMPORTANT: Membership in this list is generated by processes internal to the Eclipse Foundation. To be permanently removed from this list, you must contact emo@xxxxxxxxxxx to request removal. 




_______________________________________________
eclipse.org-architecture-council mailing list
eclipse.org-architecture-council@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse.org-architecture-council
IMPORTANT: Membership in this list is generated by processes internal to the Eclipse Foundation. To be permanently removed from this list, you must contact emo@xxxxxxxxxxx to request removal.

Back to the top