Thanks Jesse.
On 12 Sep 2012, at 13:23, Jesse McConnell wrote: That makes a touch more sense...if there were a formal alternative path to LTS that made more sense then the release train that would be something we might choose to support. good luck :) jesse -- jesse mcconnell jesse.mcconnell@xxxxxxxxxOn Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 3:29 AM, Glyn Normington <gnormington@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: Virgo participated in the Juno release train primarily in order to qualify
for LTS and yet there seem to be few other advantages, but significant
costs, in Virgo's participation. So I have been probing whether
participation in the release train should be a pre-req to LTS.
Andrew Ross and I agree (below) that the release train isn't the true
requirement, but that's the way the LTS-readiness Release Management
requirement ([1]) is currently written. The only alternative currently is to
obtain approval by a vote of the LTS Steering Committee.
I would therefore like to approach the LTS Steering Commit and request an
alternative LTS-readiness Release Management criterion in terms that can be
satisfied without participating in the release train.
Before I do that I wanted to check that the RT PMC were comfortable with
this request. Please reply by the end of this week if you are not.
Regards,
Glyn
[1] http://wiki.eclipse.org/LTS/LTS_Ready
Begin forwarded message:
From: Andrew Ross <andrew.ross@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Should LTS pre-req the release train?
Date: 12 September 2012 05:04:24 GMT+01:00
To: Glyn Normington <gnormington@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Ian Bull <irbull@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Hi Glyn, Ian
I had the same conversation in the context of Jetty. No surprise the same
answer applies.
Of the LTS readiness requirements, I do believe the simultaneous release
requirements is rather soft. Pretty much agreeing with you - there are
requirements to be on the train that we'll likely clone into the
LTS-readiness definition but the simultaneous release in and of itself isn't
a true requirement. That said, it is the easiest way to be picked up for
LTS. Otherwise the Steering Committee needs to explicitly make a decision to
bring it in.
Andrew
On 09/11/2012 10:08 AM, Glyn Normington wrote:
Hi Andrew
There has been discussion in the RT PMC and the Gemini project recently
about the participation of runtime projects in the Eclipse release train.
Jetty, for instance, will no longer be on the train as of the Kepler release
because there seem to be few advantages and significant costs of joining the
train.
The main reason Virgo joined the release train was because there is interest
in Virgo participating in the LTS programme which pre-req's the release
train. I'm not convinced that the release train really should be a pre-req.
to LTS. It is more likely that some of the release train requirements, such
as availability of releases from a standard repository, are really what LTS
requires.
What's your thinking on this?
I have coped Ian who is the RT PMC's representative on the Planning Council
as we may want to raise the same question there when you've expressed your
thoughts on the matter.
Regards,
Glyn
_______________________________________________
rt-pmc mailing list
rt-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/rt-pmc
_______________________________________________ rt-pmc mailing list rt-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/rt-pmc
|
