Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [tools-pmc] PMC Approval Requested for Linux Tools 3.1.0 Release

Thanks Doug,

Regarding our release schedule and time for developing features; it depends on the
features being implemented.

That said, we never attempt to tackle something too big in an SR1 release.
For example, we might add a new view or profiling tool or add remote support to an existing
tool.  Sometimes, just fixing an issue requires some additional APIs and thus a
minor release bump.

We don't like restricting ourselves to a point release as that means the end-user isn't
going to see any new functionality until SR2 or next year.  There's always a list of things we 
can do that would make the C/C++ Linux developer's life easier and more productive.  While I don't have any figures,
I believe a lot of our users get us through the EPP downloads so adding a December release probably wouldn't
result in a lot of testing and bug feedback for us until after SR2.

When we plan our next release we determine if we will be adding anything requiring a minor release bump
or whether a point release is all that is needed.

For stuff that is grandiose, we normally keep that on a separate branch that can be
merged into the yearly release after SR2 is out, but we don't rule out putting such items an SR2 minor
release if they are completed in time and won't impact current functionality.

-- Jeff J.

----- Original Message -----
> From: "Doug Schaefer" <dschaefer@xxxxxxx>
> To: "Tools PMC mailing list" <tools-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2014 7:01:10 PM
> Subject: Re: [tools-pmc] PMC Approval Requested for Linux Tools 3.1.0 Release
> +1 from me.
> BTW, Jeff, I¹ve been meaning to ask you and the Linuxtools crew about
> release cadence, and also bring it up with the PMC here in case others
> have opinions.
> CDT as well is doing minor releases with the SR¹s. This is to be our
> first. Marc will be submitting request for approval when he gets back from
> holidays. But I found that the SR-1 time frame to be too short to properly
> finish the features I was working on. It¹s only three months after the
> June release and add in summer holiday schedules, it¹s way less than the 4
> month cadence I was minimally comfortable with.
> The question is whether projects would feel more comfortable with a 6
> month release cadence, with minor releases in June and December. Gives us
> lots of time while still allowing us to release more often than the yearly
> releases which are trigging so much forking. Unless the whole train goes
> to this cadence, we could still deliver SR¹s as scheduled, they¹d just be
> SR¹s on the previous minor, i.e. Feb would be the SR for the Dec release.
> We had a discussion on the cdt-dev list about that. Most people were OK
> either way. I¹d like to see what other projects think and whether we may
> want to formalize the Dec release with some sort of simultaneousness. Or
> whether others have the same problem.
> Thanks!
> Doug.
> On 2014-08-28, 1:45 PM, "Jeff Johnston" <jjohnstn@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >Dear PMC Members,
> >
> >I'm requesting PMC approval for the Linux Tools 3.1.0 minor release that
> >is scheduled
> >to coincide with Eclipse Luna SR1.
> >
> >
> >ew
> >
> >The project's IP Log has been submitted and is awaiting approval.
> >
> >Regards,
> >
> >Jeff Johnston (Linux Tools Project)
> >_______________________________________________
> >tools-pmc mailing list
> >tools-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
> >To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe
> >from this list, visit
> >
> _______________________________________________
> tools-pmc mailing list
> tools-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
> To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from
> this list, visit

Back to the top