|Re: [eclipse.org-planning-council] Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Platform, PDE, JDT and Equinox are ready for Europa 3.3.1 maintenance release <eom>|
+1 to a reasonable schedule!
Another thing that would have helped out a great deal during the fall maintenance release would be better communication and more frequent builds.
For instance, last week, there were failed builds several nights in a row. If a build fails, the team in question should fix the issue and request an immediate respin. Otherwise there's too much time between builds and they are never green.
As for communication, there were many questions sent to the lists regarding the schedule. If the Europa status were sent out regularly and also noted the upcoming tasks required to hit the release dates, a lot of unnecessary email could have been avoided. Yes, it is available on the wiki but the reality is that everyone is busy and forgets to check it.
In order to alleviate confusion next time around (February 25-29) and
build in the server freeze time / EPP build time, we should really
work out a better schedule for Europa Winter Maintenance.
Here's what's in the wiki now -- note that EPP is not listed and +2 is
the same day as the release, just like this week has been:
Europa +0 +1 +2 Release
Winter 02/25 02/27 02/29 02/29
But for Ganymede, there's a 2-day lag for EPP and another
2-day+weekend lag for the release:
Ganymd +0 +1 +2 EPP Release
M2 09/21 09/26 10/03 10/05 10/09
M3 11/02 11/07 11/14 11/16 11/20
M4 12/14 12/19 01/06 01/08 01/11
M5 02/08 02/13 02/20 02/22 02/26
So, here's my suggestion. Please chime in if it's impossible or you
disagree. Silence will be considered agreement. In a week I'll update
the wiki if there's quorum.
Europa +0 +1 +2 EPP Release
Winter 02/18 02/20 02/25 02/27 02/29
On a related topic, please note that +2 (in my suggestion above) gets
more time than +1 because +2 is actually +2-to-9. IMHO, we really
ought to have more steps between +0 and Release -- I'd like to see at
least +3 and +4 added, but that's another issue for another email. If
anyone else feels this way too (eg., TPTP (3 dependents?) == +3, GMF
(8 dependents) & UML2 Tools (9 dependents) == +4) please open a new
discussion thread in this mailing list to cite your reasons why
meeting the +2 definition (and therefore schedule) is increasingly
difficult as the stack gets deeper.
Back to the top