Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [tools-pmc] Request for approval of Buildship 1.0

Hi David

Whether we graduate now or remain in incubation until Buildship is included in Mars with SR1 in fall is not critical to us.

But, we really want this to be 1.0 - not 0.9. We feel the project is mature from a technical perspective. We have added certain types of high-level functionality early and since then we have improved, polished, and fine-tuned that functionality based on our own experience and based on the feedback from the community. This is reflected in new Gradle versions, new Tooling Commons versions, and new Buildship versions. Personal feedback/input/reports came from companies/people like XText, Vogella, RedHat who I respect highly. We are ready for 1.0.

Regards, Etienne

On 18.06.2015, at 20:45, David M Williams <david_williams@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

I hope other PMC members take a look at this request, and chime in, but I'll make some high level comments.

I certainly have no objections to the project releasing, but given the version number of "1.0", I assume this review is not only for release, but also to graduate from incubation.
Do you, (project lead and mentors) really think the project is ready to be a graduated, "stand alone" project, without continued mentorship?

I know I'm old-school, but would list the following references. I wonder if you've read them?

From what I can see in the write-up, I don't really see it.

I will admit I am biased, since I'm not sure how any project can prove "ready to graduate" after only 2 months at Eclipse.

And, this project is obviously a special case, and perhaps does not fit into any Eclipse criteria (reference points) that I allows me to make a judgment?

Here's some things I found anomalous:

- 69 bugs open and many of them fixed (that's good) but seemed that most were opened by 2 or 3 people (not strong evidence of "a community", in other words).
[I know in the past, you've claimed to have a community "outside of Eclipse" ... and if that's part of the justification, then details should be given in the documentation,
such as pointers to another bug tracking system? (Not sure that's good, to have another build tracking system ... just saying, if there's something "outside" of Eclipse that demonstrates,
readiness to graduate, then I think should be included.]

- You had 4 "milestone builds" but they were a week apart. That's not normally what we would call a "milestone" at Eclipse, so wonder what your definition is. Do you plan to continue to have weekly "milestones"?
If so, would be good to cover that, and define what that means, in your release/graduation review.

Given our history, about the release train, I was afraid to say anything, for fear of giving the wrong impression of being "not supportive" or "in the way".
But, I do really do mean these remarks as constructive.
And, I feel a responsibility to "treat all projects equally" and these are questions and things I would look at for any graduating project.
And, since no other PMC members said anything ... thought I should say something.

Hope you find my comments at least a little helpful, and again, would welcome comments from other PMC members.


From:        Etienne Studer <etienne@xxxxxxxxxx>
To:        Tools PMC mailing list <tools-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx>,
Date:        06/12/2015 06:39 PM
Subject:        [tools-pmc] Request for approval of Buildship 1.0
Sent by:        tools-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx


I would like to ask for review/approval of the release review documentation of Buildship 1.0:

Thanks and kind regards, Etienne
tools-pmc mailing list
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
tools-pmc mailing list
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit

Back to the top