[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [eclipse.org-planning-council] Kepler SR2 Respin

There's no hard and fast rule ... but as soon as we get the required 3 +1's that the Exception Process requires, I always consider "passed".  

To be wordy, I think for the sake of openness (or honesty?) someone could come along within a  week and "object", ... but, it would have to be a very substantial reason to outweigh the approval of 3 other members (such as "all 3 approvers were from the same company and this change benefits only that one company, and we are unwilling to pay the cost for the re-work required") or something fundamental about the fairness of the process.  

In other words, 3 +1s are considered "passed". There's nothing more Planning Council needs to do. (Though, all members are still encouraged to read the bug and are welcome to state their opinions if they'd like).

If you hadn't noticed, the initial rework was done over the weekend,
https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=428042#c18
and
https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=428822
and the new EPP packages just finishing their re-build and submitted to maintainers for votes:
http://dev.eclipse.org/mhonarc/lists/epp-dev/msg02942.html

As far as I'm concerned, we are still on track for formal release on Friday, 2/28 ... buffers are planned for a reason :) .... but naturally another "stop ship" bug would likely cause our date to slip. I'd call a Planning Council meeting, if that happened.

Thanks,





From:        Ian Bull <irbull@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To:        Eclipse Planning Council private list <eclipse.org-planning-council@xxxxxxxxxxx>,
Date:        02/24/2014 03:08 PM
Subject:        Re: [eclipse.org-planning-council] Kepler SR2 Respin
Sent by:        eclipse.org-planning-council-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx




Thanks everyone! We have 3 +1s from PC members not directly involved (Chris, Doug and Neil) as well as Dani and myself (total of 5) which should be more than enough. This means that this issue won't be missed due to inactivity on our part. If anyone has an objection to this plan, please speak up.

David, what are the next steps from the planning council perspective? Should we leave the voting open for another day, or are we satisfied with the plan? 

Cheers,
Ian


On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 2:58 PM, Chris Aniszczyk <caniszczyk@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
+1 to 1

On Feb 21, 2014, at 4:56 PM, Doug Schaefer <
dschaefer@xxxxxxx> wrote:

+1 to fix and put our users first.

Sent from my BlackBerry Z30
From: Neil Hauge
Sent: Friday, February 21, 2014 4:45 PM
To: eclipse.org-planning-council@xxxxxxxxxxx
Reply To: Eclipse Planning Council private list
Subject: Re: [eclipse.org-planning-council] Kepler SR2 Respin


+1 to option 1 based on the recommendation from the teams closest to the situation.

Neil

On 2/21/2014 3:56 PM, Ian Bull wrote:
We have 3 options here.

1. Use the proposed fix
2. Use another fix (revert the bug fix that revealed this)
3. Do nothing.

I really think #3 is terrible option. With this bug, users will complete a successful install only to have an unusable Eclipse install. That leaves 1 or 2. The Eclipse and Equinox teams have decided that 1 is better than 2. Pascal outlined this too [1]. The reasons are [1] http://dev.eclipse.org/mhonarc/lists/platform-releng-dev/msg22016.html

I realize it's late in Europe and most North American's have been busy today with the hockey game, but it would be great to hear from everyone with a +/- 1. 

Cheers,
Ian



On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 9:40 AM, David M Williams <david_williams@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I'll abstain, but glad to re-build if rest of planning council agrees. Thought I'd explain it wasn't completely obvious to me a re-spin with current proposed fix is best (it likely is, I'm just saying I did not want to be the sole decision maker for this one ... wanted to be sure others feel the risk is worth the benefit. In another list, I've asked Pascal to explain why better to "add a fix", rather than revert the fix that "exposed" this bug. In either case I guess we' need a rebuild ... just want to be sure we are improving stability (as well as quality).

I think the procedure is that we need 3 +1's (2 more, considering Ian's is 1) and then we'll rebuild, but I hope every member reviews the bug and weighs in.


Thanks,





From:        
Ian Bull <irbull@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To:        
"eclipse.org-planning-council" <eclipse.org-planning-council@xxxxxxxxxxx>,
Date:        
02/21/2014 12:28 PM
Subject:        
[eclipse.org-planning-council] Kepler SR2 Respin
Sent by:        
eclipse.org-planning-council-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx





The p2, Equinox and Eclipse Platform team are currently in the process of fixing a serious issue in p2 [1,2]. While the issue has existed for a while, it was masked by another bug (which has been fixed). This bug is critical because it can leave users in a completely broken state (plugins may appear to be installed, but won't actually function). In the worse case, Eclipse install may no longer start after a successful provisioning operation.

I would like to request a respin of Kepler SR2 (including the repository and EPP Packages). We are still in the process of rebuilding the Eclipse Platform, but I think we should start the discussion / vote here too.

[1] 
https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=428575
[2] 
http://dev.eclipse.org/mhonarc/lists/cross-project-issues-dev/msg10328.html

Cheers,
Ian

--
R. Ian Bull | EclipseSource Victoria | +1 250 477 7484

http://eclipsesource.com | http://twitter.com/eclipsesource _______________________________________________
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.

_______________________________________________

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.



--
R. Ian Bull | EclipseSource Victoria | +1 250 477 7484

http://eclipsesource.com | http://twitter.com/eclipsesource


_______________________________________________
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.

_______________________________________________
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.

_______________________________________________
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.



--
R. Ian Bull | EclipseSource Victoria | +1 250 477 7484

http://eclipsesource.com | http://twitter.com/eclipsesource _______________________________________________
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.