Re: [eclipse.org-planning-council] Buildship to join Mars

[David M Williams <david_williams@xxxxxxxxxx>]

As Planning Council chair, I wanted to
close this request and discussion, by formally stating this exception request
is "not approved". 

While some on Planning Council were
in favor of it, some were not, or wanted to see additional evidence that
they fit in well, which would be hard to do. Since we "rule by consensus"
(not majority rule) it seems clear from the discussion that, as a group,
we are not comfortable with this late addition. 

The discussion about alternatives was
good to hear, and I think some of those are long term changes in processes
that deserve further discussion, but for the short term needs of the Buildship
project, I think there were a couple of concrete alternatives that fit
in with existing rules and processes, and I hope fit with their needs and
processes: 

1) They could still release in June,
under normal EDP release procedures, and simply release from their own
repository, and have their own downloads of what ever form they'd like.


2) In addition, they could "join
the train" (be in Sim. Release repository) in September, for SR1,
assuming that between July and September they contributed regularly for
aggregation builds by contributing their features in a new b3aggrcon file
and are responsive to fixing issues that caused, if any (as well as meet
all the other criteria for being in the Sim. Release). 

In closing, I appreciate everyone's
participation in the discussion, and just as important, appreciate your
support of new projects at Eclipse, especially one as important as providing
Gradle support. I'm sure we all will continue to be supportive of the Buildship
project and new projects in general. 

Thank you all, 







From:      
 Wayne Beaton <wayne@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To:      
 eclipse.org-planning-council@xxxxxxxxxxx,

Date:      
 04/04/2015 02:15 PM
Subject:    
   [eclipse.org-planning-council]
Buildship to join Mars
Sent by:    
   eclipse.org-planning-council-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx

---

Greetings Planning Council.

As I stated on the call, I believe that Buildship conforms to the EDP and--pending
completion of the IP due-diligence process--is ready to do a proper release
from Eclipse.

I have some further work to do to confirm that Buildship meets with the
simultaneous release participation requirements.

On this Wednesday's call, we had discussed getting some independent Gradle
experts to sign-off on the quality of the project. After some reflection,
it occurred to me that we do not make this requirement of any other participant
and so I consider it unfair to impose this requirement on Buildship. I
would like to remove this from any acceptance criteria.

The EMO considers the inclusion of Gradle tools important for this release.
I've discussed why we think this is important at length, but am more than
happy to provide more background if necessary. The quality of this new
Gradle support is very important, so we're going to take the unprecedented
step of connecting with Gradle experts from the community to ensure that
the contribution is of the necessary quality. But, again, I don't feel
that this is a reasonable criterion for acceptance of the project as part
of Mars.

As we discussed, there are two levels of acceptance here. First, we need
the Planning Council to allow Buildship to join the simultaneous release.
Once on board, I will work with the package maintainers to determine if
they will include Buildship in their package definitions or not. There
is another further decision to make regarding whether or not it is included
in the "Eclipse Projects" Market that we discussed for the Eclipse
Marketplace.

With this in mind, I respectfully request that the Planning Council set
the following as the acceptance criteria for bringing Buildship into the
simultaneous release:

* Conformance with the EDP; and
* Conformance with the rules for participation in the Simultaneous release.

I trust that the Planning Council will accept my assertion that these criteria
have been met after I've done my review.

If anybody would like to propose additional acceptance criteria, please
do so ASAP.

Since time is tight, I will ask that we start the vote immediately using
our standard voting rules. Please respond on this thread with +1, 0, or
-1 by EOB on Friday, April 10/2015.

Thanks,

Wayne
-- 
Wayne Beaton
@waynebeaton
The Eclipse Foundation

_______________________________________________
eclipse.org-planning-council mailing list
eclipse.org-planning-council@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse.org-planning-council

IMPORTANT: Membership in this list is generated by processes internal to
the Eclipse Foundation.  To be permanently removed from this list,
you must contact emo@xxxxxxxxxxx to request removal.