Re: [escet-dev] Eclipse ESCET v0.2 plans

["Beek, Bert van" <D.A.v.Beek@xxxxxx>]

Hi all,

> On 7 May 2021, at 08:17, Hofkamp, Albert <A.T.Hofkamp@xxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> Hai Dennis,
> 
> > I've not yet received any responses on my proposal on my last message, see below.
> 
> I didn't see any new leads to respond to.
> 
> 
> > be good to discuss the longer run, i.e. releases after v0.2
> 
> > I've just created a release entry for v0.2 ... june.
> 
> I assume you're trying to make progress here, and that's good, but it looks like the wrong order of things to me.
> 
> 
> It seems to me that nobody really understands how to go about releases, so I would say that needs to be discussed and agreed upon first before trying to release things. Currently, everybody seems to be waiting for someone else.

I don’t understand this. I see a lot of bug being fixed and am very pleased with progress.

> 
> To get out of this deadlock, I think we should start working according to the ESCET organization structure.
> 
> 
> One possible form on getting project-wide agreement on what to do, is to make a general plan, some sort of framework, a project-wide agreed collection of standard questions and decisions about releases in general, what steps to take for a release, who to inform, how, and perhaps when, etc. As an example that may be in those decisions, we probably should first have a target release date, and then ask ourselves what to aim for in that period (assuming time-based periods).
> If we want a more formal process, steps should have a list of roles that should give input, and a list of roles that should agree, but I am not sure this is necessary (ie the decision what to include or exclude in the framework is also something that should be discussed within the project in my view.)
> 
> With a project-wide agreed framework we would have at least some agreed set of steps and their order, so everybody knows what to expect and understands what to do, hopefully avoiding the current confusion and resulting lack of progress.
> 
> 
> With such a framework, we can then make progress for release 0.2 and further (the latter should probably also be discussed in the framework, how far ahead do we go in planning?).

I would be very happy if we could release v0.2 en of June with as many bugs fixed as possible along with some other issues. I think the problem here is time available for contributors. So in principle, if anybody want to fix something in cooperation with others, in the way Ferdie and Dennis are working, I am happy.

> 
> Within the ESCET organisation, I think the project leads are the persons that should take steps here. Given the scope probably the project board and committers should also know and agree.
> 
> In any case, I am willing to give constructive feedback.
> 
> -----
> 
> With such a framework, we can then make progress for release 0.2 and further (the latter should probably also be discussed in the framework, how far ahead do we go in planning?)​.
> 
> [The framework doesn't look likely to be finished before June, which means the 0.2 release date should be moved or a decision needs to be made to go ahead (and likely include whatever is in the develop branch at that time).]

I like end of June as release date, since my class of 180 students will start in September and I would like to have some time left for using the release.

Bert
> 
> Albert