Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [] Who's +3 again?

I agree with your banding calculation.
When we agreed to put TPTP in the +2  last year it was because of integration and testing dependancies on WTP,  BIRT, EMF and platform that put us there. In theory TPTP is a candidate for +3 but we have just managed the risk as a +2 and it has worked so far although last minute crisis have happened.

Thanks for your time.
Harm Sluiman,
IBM Distinguished Engineer
phone:905-413-4032   fax: 4920  cell: 1-647-300-4758
Admin : Queenie Lam qlam@xxxxxxxxxx  Tie: 313-5864 1-905-413-5864

Oisin Hurley <ohurley@xxxxxxxx>
Sent by:

11/14/2007 05:35 AM

Please respond to
""        <>

"" <>
Re: [] Who's +3 again?

So when we were mangling the schedule timings to compress the +  
we brought in +3 to happen 2 days after +2 - I was looking for a  
short grace
period in which we could ensure that SOA Tools was 100% after all our +2
dependencies had hit their date. IFIRC, UML2 Tools had the same issue.

> 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?

I don't think that the +differentials correlate with the number of
dependencies. It's a banding exercise, and right now there are
+0, +1, +2, +3 and EPP final bands.

> 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 line blur?

I've always held the thought that you should compute the band using

 (my band) = (my dependency with highest band number) + 1


IONA Technologies PLC (registered in Ireland)
Registered Number: 171387
Registered Address: The IONA Building, Shelbourne Road, Dublin 4, Ireland
_______________________________________________ mailing list

Back to the top