Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [eclipse.org-planning-council] Status of SR2 respin plan

+1 from me as well.

It does point out that we do have an issue with the Egit project. They have been spinning on two month release cycles the last few times. Expecting them to put the next release into RC1 which is like halfway through their cycle might not be desirable. Taking the existing released version at that time makes sense, which leads us to 2.2. But it does mean we'll be a release behind their latest when the train launches.

It's a bit of a clash of cultures so I can see how this situation arose, but Egit is a critical linch pin for our community. We need to get this right.

Doug.

From: John Arthorne <John_Arthorne@xxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-To: "eclipse.org-planning-council" <eclipse.org-planning-council@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Monday, 25 February, 2013 9:19 AM
To: "eclipse.org-planning-council" <eclipse.org-planning-council@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [eclipse.org-planning-council] Status of SR2 respin plan

For what it's worth, +1 to your updated plan of including EGit 2.2. This isn't what we said in the meeting last week, but we didn't have all the right details in front of us (for example that 2.2 had been contributed in previous RC already). Also, whatever is easiest for you and Markus at this point as far as how we get it done.

John




From:        David M Williams <david_williams@xxxxxxxxxx>
To:        eclipse.org-planning-council@xxxxxxxxxxx,
Date:        02/24/2013 09:38 PM
Subject:        [eclipse.org-planning-council] Status of SR2 respin plan
Sent by:        eclipse.org-planning-council-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx




Colleagues,

Just wanted to keep you all up-to-date on the latest plan for Juno SR2 respin.


First, my little "surgical" manipulation didn't work but by the time I tried, I was mostly curious. I think Konstantin had a good point that the aggregator is an easy way to make sure no one else in repo slipped in a hard requirement on EGit 2.3. While there's other ways to tell, I also became concerned about that approach because a) The aggregator makes the "categories" too, and apparently there were changes there too, and b) it is common "practice" (or, best practice, if not a common) that when composites are used, each sub-repo of the composite is itself "well formed" which it would not be if we simply removed EGit. (Or, at least, would be hard to tell, and that is what the b3 aggregator does easily).


So, after deciding to use the "make an aggregation from the aggregation" approach, it was just a question of which version of EGit to use. I went with 2.2 (instead of 2.1) since there was a request from WTP's PMC lead (who also maintains the JEE package) and others, on cross-project list. That, and even if we "tightened the rules" about minor updates during maintenance releases, EGit's 2.2. release would almost qualify, except they missed RC1 and RC2. (I added some ideas for "tightening the rules" in the summary of our "emergency meeting" [1] ... we can discuss at next meeting (or, at least before next maintenance release :)  


I've opened bug 401639 to document the mechanics of the respin, but if any of you have any concerns/comments about this slightly updated plan, please say. We can always hold another emergency meeting if you'd like? :)  My only concern at this point is if there's some "greedy requirement" or or something that gets pulled in, that might effect packages ... unlikely, but ... we'll know on Monday, or Tuesday.


In all seriousness, thanks for your help sorting through this complicated situation.



[1]
http://wiki.eclipse.org/Planning_Council/February_22_2013#Summary
[2]
https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=401639
_______________________________________________
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.


Back to the top