|[eclipse.org-planning-council] A suggested topic for Planning Council Discussion|
Since such issues often involve a cost-benefit analysis
or trade off, I suggest we build-in a Planning Council mechanism that allows
for reasonable exceptions. Besides allowing for those reasonable exceptions,
this might help avoid being too cautious on saying what is "required".
For example, my suggested wording would be, "If projects do not meet
the required constraints, they will be removed from the Ganymede release
1. The project applies for an exception that is reviewed and approved by majority vote of the Planning Council (that is, majority vote with no substantial objections).
2. The project has a plan for rectifying the noncompliant item by the next coordinated yearly release. Exceptions can not be granted two years in a row -- either compliance will be achieved, or the rule changed.
Thought I'd post this now, so some thought/discussion could take place beforehand. Maybe there is some reason it _has_ to be the EMO for some reason that I am not aware of?
Back to the top