From: eclipse.org-planning-council-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:eclipse.org-planning-council-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Gaff, Doug
Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2007
8:58 AM
To: eclipse.org-planning-council
Subject: RE: [eclipse.org-planning-council]
A suggested topic for PlanningCouncil Discussion
From: eclipse.org-planning-council-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:eclipse.org-planning-council-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Bjorn Freeman-Benson
Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2007
9:09 PM
To: eclipse.org-planning-council
Subject: Re:
[eclipse.org-planning-council] A suggested topic for PlanningCouncil Discussion
Doug, David, et al.,
Even if you’re a project that does
get removed, you can still release on the same day. Other than getting your
bits mentioned in an over crowded update site, it’s not overly obvious
what the benefits of being in the simultaneous release trains are at the
moment.
The major advantage of
being in the train is priority in getting your IP reviewed. Clearly there is
going to be more demand for IP reviews than the legal team will be able to
handle - that's just a fact. As per the Board's desire, the IP team will
prioritize the "on the train" projects higher than the "off the
train but wanting to release on the same date" projects... And, if you
don't have your IP reviewed, you can't release your bits... etc. So if you're a
project that does get removed, you (may or) may not be able to release on the
same day.
And in my mind that’s the real
problem with the RC. Their influence in the day to day operations of Eclipse
projects isn’t very strong.
Perhaps a better term is
"non-existent" :-)
Given that committers are the only ones
that have power on the projects,
Unfortunately, that's not true. The Board also has
power over the projects. The Board defines the IP process, for example, and
that has a big effect on the projects. And the Board has passed a unanimous
resolution about the projects (and simultaneous release) being better this
year. So... we (the EMO) need to follow this directive from the Board. And that
means that we need firm requirements that raise the bar. Hence this discussion.
- Bjorn "once again the heavy that people complain about" Freeman-Benson