Re: [eclipse.org-planning-council] Notes and Calendar from 8/5 PC Meetin

[Oliver E Cole <oec@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

  One calendar.  The entire focus of the PC is the release train, so it 
makes total sense to have the PC calendar containt the release train.

  If the PC had multiple independent "missions", then it would perhaps 
be confusing to have one calendar for all, but the PC has one mission: 
release train coordination.

--oec

David M Williams wrote:
> I'm disappointed more people could not attend the weeks Planning Council 
> meeting, but those that did, got a lot done. 
>
> So, for those that were not there, please read the notes carefully and let 
> us know if questions or issues. 
> http://wiki.eclipse.org/Planning_Council/August_05_2009
>
> For those that were there, thank you, and let me know if I captured 
> anything incorrectly. 
>
> The major accomplishments were 
>
> - finalized the rampdown dates for Galileo SR1 (and I "filled in" the 
> dates for SR2, since same pattern, I can't imagine any controversy). 
>
> - finalized the dates for Helios Milestones along with the +0, +1 ... 
> patterns. 
>
> I was so excited I filled in a Google Calendar with all the dates, and it 
> was only after I was done did I realize I put them all on the Planning 
> Council calendar. 
>
> http://www.google.com/calendar/embed?src=gchs7nm4nvpm837469ddj9tjlk%40group.calendar.google.com&ctz=America/New_York
>
> instead of the "Galileo Calendar"
>
> http://www.google.com/calendar/embed?src=e7qn66hb96fvgbnlrkfng6n0r0%40group.calendar.google.com&ctz=America/New_York
>
> I can transfer all the events, eventually, if needed ... but, does anyone 
> think we need multiple calendars? I guess we'd need a new Helios Calendar 
> to be consistent. Or will the one "Planning Council Calendar" suffice? It 
> seems all it had on it was the monthly meetings. If we have just one, it 
> might ensure everyone saw the overlap of Galileo and Helios, etc. ... but 
> I'm fine with any scheme, if anyone has any strong advice or preferences. 
>
> Unlike previous years, we want to keep the "simultaneous" part of 
> "Simultaneous Release" flowing through all the milestones. This should be 
> easier than in previous years, since the builds and EPP are better 
> automated than before ... and it mostly just requires projects make sure 
> they "keep up" to some minimal amount to not break the build, continue to 
> run, etc. That is, we'll set the other and exact criteria later, but would 
> think everyone who is already in the build can stay in the build. We've 
> vaguely talked about this before, but don't recall if we ever closed on it 
> as a group. So ... if any projects you represent are unwilling to 
> participate in early milestones, let us know. (For example, if GEF wasn't 
> willing, we'd be hosed :) But otherwise I'll assume everyone is willing. 
>
> Thanks, 
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> eclipse.org-planning-council mailing list
> eclipse.org-planning-council@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse.org-planning-council
>
> IMPORTANT: Membership in this list is generated by processes internal to the Eclipse Foundation.  To be permanently removed from this list, you must contact emo@xxxxxxxxxxx to request removal.

--
--
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Oliver E Cole                                  oec@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
OC Systems                                     www.ocsystems.com
9990 Lee Hwy, Suite 270                        (v) 703.359.8160 x160
Fairfax, VA, 22030                             (f) 703.359.8161