|Re: [eclipse.org-planning-council] Simultaneous Release Brainstorming|
|Option 2 also has my +1.|
About announcing to cross-project, I 'd suggest we have a better idea about the implications for participating projects before we just throw out the idea. We need to be pedagogical that the change does not mean that projects will be force to move to such a cadence etc.
What about starting a FAQ on the wiki with the common questions we can already think about? Adding a link to this FAQ in your announcement to cross project will certainly help.
Also, here are some comments about your draft email:
Are we only making a proposal or are did we already decide about a couple of things? We need to be clear about what we decided and what is still open to comments / feedback as I guess we don't want to start infinite discussions about all of these.
I would explain that we would like to move from a 1 year release cycle to a X weeks release cycle and explain the main motivations. I would also draft the GA dates: end of June, September, December, March.
While everyone at the planning council knows what it means, we would need to explain that there will be no more service releases for simrel, but it does not prevent individual projects to do so.
I'm not sure to fully map that back to our discussions. Would you please elaborate? By "only one" you mean a global aggregated one of all simrel releases starting after photon? and latest pointing the latest component of this single aggregated one? Then "latest" is not "stable", it's a moving target pointing to the latest stable.
I don't get this line.
"someone" => we need to clear that out before going public. I guess that stating "the planning council" would enough for public announcement.
Add that each project is responsible for its API deprecation policy.
explain what means "C" and what it is, how is it different from milestones and RC.
Do you really want to get feedback about it? People will probably focus on this part instead of the other (look at what happened with EE4J/Eclipse Jakarta EE). We should come with a decision, or a poll with different choices, but no open discussion.
Also, what about taking the opportunity to moving to a rolling release to make it clear that the simrel is specific entity, e.g., by naming it Eclipse Simultaneous Release 2018.09?
Mikaël Barbero - Eclipse Foundation
IT Services - Release Engineering
📱 (+33) 642 028 039
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
Back to the top