[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
|
Re: [eclipse.org-planning-council] A suggested topic for PlanningCouncil Discussion
|
<Bjorn>Well, maybe. Yes there is a vote, but no, nobody votes most of the
time - Anne has to beg the PMCs of the affected projects to vote so that
the projects can release. So, realistically, the reviews are not a bar in
our current process.</Bjorn>
Be that as it may, my point is the same. We have policies and procedures
designed to include the Eclipse community at large, and I was wondering how
policies decided only by the Planning Council interact with that system.
<Bjorn>All it means is that they would have to release later in the summer
rather than on the exact day. Nobody is saying that non-train projects
won't get IP reviewed, just that they might not get it reviewed by June
28th.</Bjorn>
I should have been clearer here. Of course it is possible that a project
not on the release train but wishing to release on the same day as the
release train could get its IP reviewed in time, and it is possible that
projects on the release train might not get their IP reviewed in time . In
the past, however, I think it's fair to say that projects on the release
train have enjoyed higher priority for their IP requests, and I was
wondering if the release train is the right way to make such a distinction
in service levels (assuming we should at all), rather than (random examples
follow), say, mature/incubating, +1 dependency/+2 dependency projects
differences.
Regards,
John Graham
Eclipse Data Tools Platform PMC Chair
Staff Software Engineer, Sybase, Inc.
http://dataplat.blogspot.com/
Bjorn
Freeman-Benson
<bjorn.freeman-be To
nson@xxxxxxxxxxx> "eclipse.org-planning-council"
Sent by: <eclipse.org-planning-council@eclip
eclipse.org-plann se.org>
ing-council-bounc cc
es@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject
Re: [eclipse.org-planning-council]
11/01/2007 06:58 A suggested topic for
PM PlanningCouncil Discussion
Please respond to
"eclipse.org-plan
ning-council"
<eclipse.org-plan
ning-council@ecli
pse.org>
John Graham wrote:
Eclipse projects are very
public about on-going progress, and there is a community vote as part
of
the release.
Well, maybe. Yes there is a vote, but no, nobody votes most of the time -
Anne has to beg the PMCs of the affected projects to vote so that the
projects can release. So, realistically, the reviews are not a bar in our
current process.
But part
me also feels that it is unfair to projects not on the release
train.....
All it means is that they would have to release later in the summer rather
than on the exact day. Nobody is saying that non-train projects won't get
IP reviewed, just that they might not get it reviewed by June 28th.
Gaff, Doug wrote:
As Doug S points out, EPP is a great step in that direction. I have
no
desire to use the update manager to get the projects I want. We
shouldn't even support it, IMO. It's not maintained anymore.
Nice point, Doug and Doug - I like this idea.
If this is strategic to the EMO/Board, then pony up. The board must
vote on staffing coordinated testing for Ganymede and member
companies
must then present their test plans for everyone else to see and
judge.
Having the EMO wish it doesn't make it so. Without commitment from
each
member company, there will be no "trickle down" staffing to do extra
cross-project testing. That is the reality.
Well said.
Otherwise, forget all that
meritocracy crap and just declare that some projects are better and
more
important than others.
Doesn't a meritocracy imply that some projects are better than other
projects? Isn't that what merit is?
Doug Schaefer wrote:
I think we’ve started something with the EPP packages. I’m seeing these get
reviewed in the blogosphere, instead of the individual projects. It may be
interesting to focus on them as official Eclipse “products” and have the
bar set sufficiently high on them to make them truly product quality. If
you’re not in a package, you’re not on the train. Of course that would
require us to have product management around these packages to make sure
the best components are selected for the market, and to work the
requirements with the projects. Just a thought…
I like that idea - make the release train build management open to all
projects that conform to minimal build requirements. Make the packages
open to projects that are part of the release train build management and
also meet certain quality criteria. (That is what you're suggesting,
right?)
Ed Merks wrote:
Maybe I'd better quit before I've annoyed
everyone...
Ed, that's my role in this organization! How dare you usurp it! :-)
P.S.
But it makes for very interesting notes though!
Eclipse doesn't just have code, it has drama too!! What more could
you
want from a vibrant community? Sax and violins perhaps?
I think this discussion has been (and continues to be) very useful and
positive. There have been no flame wars, no acrimony, and lots of positive
suggestions. Lots of opinions (opinions are always good) on multiple sides
of the fence. Lots of discussion. This is great!
--
[end of message]_______________________________________________
eclipse.org-planning-council mailing list
eclipse.org-planning-council@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse.org-planning-council
