Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
[emft-dev] EMFT "Project" Compare 0.7.0 release without a Release Review?

Oops, this bounced sending to mailing lists. Trying again.

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Nick Boldt < nickboldt@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sep 13, 2007 11:56 AM
Subject: Re: [modeling-pmc] Re: [emft-dev] EMFT "Project" Compare 0.7.0 release without a Release Review?
To: PMC members mailing list < modeling-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Cédric Brun <cedric.brun@xxxxxxx>, emo@xxxxxxxxxxx, Janet Campbell < janet.campbell@xxxxxxxxxxx>, emft-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx


We treat all our components that way -- as independent entities -- be they in EMF, MDT, M2T, or EMFT. But as with Ed and Cedric, I too was under the impression that a RR was only required when releasing a 1.0+ version, not a 0.x version.

Consider the following 8 precedents:

EODM: 0.7.0, 0.8.0
UML2 Tools: 0.7.0
JET: 0.7.0, 0.8.0
JET Editor 0.7.0
CDO: 0.7.0
Net4j: 0.7.0

I don't think any of these underwent a RR. In fact, JET rolled back from 1.0 to 0.7 because Paul wanted to be able to release code w/o having to go through a review.

When did the policy (or its interpretation) change? Releasing incubating components in 0.x versions w/o going through a review has been BAU for the past 2 years.



On 9/13/07, Bjorn Freeman-Benson < bjorn.freeman-benson@xxxxxxxxxxx > wrote:
Given that EMFT is treating it's components as projects (independently
managed, independently scheduled, independently released), the
requirements most definitely apply to components.

Cédric Brun wrote:
> Hi,
> I'll rename the release as soon as possible, sorry about that. I'm afraid I
> misunderstood the process as I though the release review would concern
> projects and not components, most especially components still being in
> incubation phase.
modeling-pmc mailing list

Back to the top