Galileo Release Reviews
Today we held the big review call for projects included in the Galileo release. One of the interesting things that came out in the call is that the number of project reviews appears at odds with the number of projects listed in the Projects section on the Galileo Simultaneous Release wiki page. It all depends on how you count things. If you treat each row in the table, then there are thirty-three (33) projects participating. However, some rows in the table list multiple projects/sub-projects/components. In the end, we did forty-eight (48) reviews today. One project has, thus far, been a no-show. Another project, EclipseLink, released the version they’re including in Galileo some time ago and therefore did not have to participate in the review.
All projects are doing releases leading up to Galileo. Several projects are also graduating. Graduation essentially means that a project is moving from the “incubating” phase into the “mature” phase. Graduation typically occurs along with a “1.0″ release (this is the case for all graduating projects today).
There have been some challenges along the way. Many projects did not provide their IP Logs to emo-ip-team@ until very late in the game. Some projects were not aware that they are required to submit their IP Logs prior to a release. This is something that those of us involved in the process are going to try and do a better job of as we move forward. Everything is documented in the Eclipse Development Process, but I have to admit that I sometimes have problems finding what I need to know. We’ll continue to work on smoothing out this process, and in providing hints where-ever we can.
On the topic of IP Logs, Gabe and I have started working on a new generation Automated IP Log Tool. We’re still very early in the development process, so much of it is still experimental. I’ll tell you more about it in the coming weeks, but the short version is this… it’s a feature that you install into your Eclipse workbench.
Anyway, the release/graduation review call went well today. I have a few bits and pieces to work through to satisfy myself that all the projects involved are ready, but I do anticipate everybody passing. Good work everyone.
Posted June 10th, 2009 by Wayne Beaton in category: Community
You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.
3 Responses to “Galileo Release Reviews”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in using your Eclipse Bugzilla account to post a comment.
Doug Schaefer Says:
June 10th, 2009 at 2:48 pm
Thanks, Wayne, you did an awesome job pulling this together.
Nick Boldt Says:
June 10th, 2009 at 5:52 pm
Ah, but for me the real question is did anyone fail to release or graduate, including the no-show project? Was the process a formality, or a real ‘thesis defence’-like event?
And, if (as I suspect) in fact’s it’s really just a “do you have all your ducks lined up?” - “OK, ” non-event, could it be lighter-weight for next year, perhaps via some Portal-enabled automated workflow?
Wayne Beaton Says:
June 11th, 2009 at 10:52 am
@Doug Thanks.
@Nick The no-show will not release unless they step up and bring all the pieces that are needed together. We’ll do a special review for them if they can do this. I have reached out several times, but have not received any response.
I like to think that the process is more than a formality. However, it was also not very much of a thesis defense. From my perspective, it was important to get everybody together to “face” each other prior to the big event.
I’m not sure that dropping the call is the right way to streamline this process further. I am concerned that reviews are a bit of a waste of time, but primarily because I don’t think that anybody prepares for them in advance. My sense is that it just takes too much effort to locate, download, and the view the docuware for a single project, let alone any significant subset of the 48. I think I/we need to sort out a way to make folks a little more nosy about what the other projects are doing.
I’m going to start blogging more about the reviews that we’re doing; my hope is that by disseminating the information contained in the review docuware in a more digestible format might pique more interest and involvement.