| Hi Andrew
Virgo is currently planning not to join the Kepler release train on the basis of the unanimous agreement below to decouple LTS readiness from the simultaneous release. Since there doesn't seem to have been a formal change of policy for LTS readiness, I would be grateful if the LTS Steering Committee would explicitly approve Virgo for LTS participation so that we won't have to scramble to join the release train late if the change of policy takes much longer to be made.
Also, please could you also tell me whether minutes of the LTS steering committee meetings are being posted anywhere? If not, I for one would certainly like that to happen so the Eclipse community can keep in touch with how things are going.
Thanks!
On 28 Nov 2012, at 14:26, Glyn Normington wrote: Thanks Andrew! I didn't notice any posts on this to lts-iwg@xxxxxxxxxxx. Please could you tell me if there's another mailing list and where I might peruse the minutes of the meetings so far.
(No-one replied to my plea below "... and let me know that this has been done" so I was left in the dark. I guess everyone on the Steering Committer thought it was someone else's job to reply.)
On 28 Nov 2012, at 14:22, Andrew Ross wrote:
Hi Glyn,
Thank you for reminding us that we're overdue for an update on
this.
The LTS steering committee has been meeting regularly (weekly with
some disruption from holidays, etc) and iterating a proposal to
address this. Our next meeting is this week.
I believe it is fair to say there is unanimous agreement to
decouple LTS readiness from the simultaneous release.
We're currently working on the protocol for the Steering committee
to decide upon bringing projects into LTS. This is the top
priority item on the agenda for our meetings.
Andrew
On 11/28/2012 09:11 AM, Glyn Normington wrote:
Hi Andrew
I've heard nothing since I sent the email a month ago. Please
could you let me know if the LTS Steering Committee has received
the item and put it on an agenda or otherwise what is going on?
Thanks!
Begin forwarded message:
Subject: Re:
LTS Readiness Criteria for Runtime Projects
Date: 14
November 2012 14:00:27 GMT
It's two weeks
since I sent this email and I haven't seen any response or
acknowledgement. Please could the leader of the LTS
Steering Committee let me know when this topic will be
discussed?
Thanks.
On 29 Oct 2012, at 13:49, Glyn Normington wrote:
The RT PMC's list of
Simultaneous Release requirements that need not be
LTS readiness criteria for runtime projects is
available in the minutes of the RT PMC for 17
October 2012 ([1]).
I would be grateful if the LTS Steering
Committee would:
(a) vote to approve Virgo for participation
in LTS without it necessarily participating in
the simultaneous release (as per [2]).
(b) consider the above input of the RT PMC
and amend [2] appropriately.
Please let me know if you need anything else
from the RT PMC.
Since I do not have the email addresses
of all the members of the LTS Steering
Committee and I can't tell whether they all
subscribe to this list, I would be grateful
if someone on this list could forward this
email to the Steering Committee and let me
know that has been done.
Begin forwarded message:
Subject: Virog in LTS
(minutes)
Date: 25 September 2012
16:07:42 GMT+01:00
To: "Bindewald,
Jutta" <jutta.bindewald@xxxxxxx>,
"Rastetter, Thomas" <thomas.rastetter@xxxxxxx>,
"Schmidt, Karsten" <k.schmidt@xxxxxxx>,
"'jkrause@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx'"
<jkrause@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
"'andrew.ross@xxxxxxxxxxx'"
<andrew.ross@xxxxxxxxxxx>,
"'gnormington@xxxxxxxxxx'"
<gnormington@xxxxxxxxxx>,
"'jesse.mcconnell@xxxxxxxxx'"
<jesse.mcconnell@xxxxxxxxx>,
"Kapukaranov, Borislav" <borislav.kapukaranov@xxxxxxx>
Minutes: Virgo in LTS
(September, 25)
Participants: Karsten Schmidt,
Jochen Krause, Glyn Normington,
Andrew Ross, Boris Kapuaranov,
Jesse McConnell, Thomas
Rasteter,Jutta Bindewald
Problem: Runtime projects
usually do not participate in the
simultaneous release (SR) because
SR consists of IDE components.
In the case of Virgo only a
small subset belongs to SR.
After some discussion there was
general agreement to extract the
appropriate requirements from the
SR requirement list to the LTS
readiness definition instead of
the existing requirement that the
project is released as part of SR.
There was a discussion if it
makes sense to require in general
that components in the LTS have to
be bundles.
There was general agreement
that also runtime projects shall
be eligible to participate in LTS.
Next steps: The RT PMC provides
a list of the SR requirements that
make no sense for runtime
projects. This list will be sent
to the steering committee (Pat
Huff, Jochen Krause, Thomas
Rastetter and Paul Lipton). The
steering committee will in its
first meeting planned for October
attempt to discuss and potentially
decide the Virgo case and enter
into the general discussion about
LTS readiness definition
especially for runtime projects.
Dr. Jutta Bindewald
Development
Manager
Tip
CORE Java Infrastructure
SAP AG
Dietmar-Hopp-Allee 16
69190 Walldorf, Germany
Pflichtangaben/Mandatory
Disclosure Statements: http://www.sap.com/company/legal/impressum.epx
Diese E-Mail kann
Betriebs- oder
Geschäftsgeheimnisse oder
sonstige vertrauliche
Informationen enthalten.
Sollten Sie diese E-Mail
irrtümlich erhalten haben, ist
Ihnen eine Kenntnisnahme des
Inhalts, eine Vervielfältigung
oder Weitergabe der E-Mail
ausdrücklich untersagt. Bitte
benachrichtigen Sie uns und
vernichten Sie die empfangene
E-Mail. Vielen
Dank.
This e-mail may
contain trade secrets or
privileged, undisclosed, or
otherwise confidential
information. If you have
received this e-mail in error,
you are hereby notified that
any review, copying, or
distribution of it is strictly
prohibited. Please inform us
immediately and destroy the
original transmittal. Thank
you for your cooperation.
|
