Thanks for the explanation Nick. I believe my projects are
still +2 based on this explanation.
For projects with more complex dependencies, I do find the
banding confusing, though.
[mailto:eclipse.org-planning-council-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Nick
Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2007 6:38 PM
Subject: Re: [eclipse.org-planning-council] Who's +3 again?
a) EPP is supposed to be building as part of Ganymatic. If not today, then
sooner or later. Bjorn's AFK for a while so I don't know the update on this or
how often he'll be mail-checking.
b) What I'd wanted when suggesting the need for +3 and +4 was a way for the
long-stack builds like GMF (8 dependencies) and UML2 Tools (9 dependencies) to
have more time to get everything in place and to test. Having everyone
+2-or-more trying to release on the same day meant that the +5, +8, +9
components sometimes were delayed and thus ended up being late. To avoid this I
wanted to introduce more levels of granularity than just Platform, the handful
of +1s, and the 'everyone else' bucket.
So, that said... here's a question. Should +2 still mean "only two
deps" or should it mean "2-5 deps" and +3 be the tier for
"5+ deps"? In other words, should people be able to decide which date
they want, the +2 or the +3 date?
Or have we just decided on Platform, handful of +1s, all the +2s, and everyone
else == +3-or-more?
I put this question to the projects/components with the longer stacks: if you
depend on more than Eclipse + EMF, are you a +2 or a +3? And where does the
I'm a litte verklempt. Discuss. ;-)