| RE: [cdt-dev] CDT 3.0 Closing |
|
I’ll provide my input now, since I’ll be on vacation for the next 2 weeks, except for next Wed and Thurs.
> 2. Where do we feel we stand with respect to the quality of 3.0? We have less dedicated test resources as with previous releases - what are people's assesment? To Chris' point, are we overreaching? And are people comfortable with the bugs we moved forward to "future" (e.g. are there any bugs people feel should really be looked at)?
From the MBS perspective, I feel that we have gotten more “community” testing than in any prior release. The only areas of new MBS functionality that I don’t feel comfortable with the level of testing are the new tool-chain converter support and the new multi-version tool-chain support. I don’t suggest that we change the schedule for that reason. If things need to be fixed, we’ll fix them in a 3.01 or 3.1.
Regarding the other opens bugs, I agree with others than we should not stick to the schedule irregardless of the quality. If there are bugs that should be fixed, then we should slip the schedule to fix them. From my perspective, it is more important to fix regressions and crashes (unless they require uncommon circumstances) than bugs in the new functionality.
Regards, Leo
From:
cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Sebastien Marineau
To follow-up on the 3.0 closing...
1. As it stands, we have 17 open bugs against 3.x. Looking at the bugs, the majority look like they will be moved forward (99744 is definitely required). I just spoke with Mikhail and Alain, they are evaluating the bugs in their name and will either fix for RC3 or move to future. They can provide an update on where this stands.
===== current 3.x bugs =====
2. Where do we feel we stand with respect to the quality of 3.0? We have less dedicated test resources as with previous releases - what are people's assesment? To Chris' point, are we overreaching? And are people comfortable with the bugs we moved forward to "future" (e.g. are there any bugs people feel should really be looked at)?
3. I've started putting the material together for the release review (you can see the presentations from other projects at http://www.eclipse.org/org/processes/previous-release-reviews.html). This is something that's been part of the Eclipse process, but has not been done in the past. For CDT 3.0, we have to go throgh this process and all have to be comfortable with the release).
Related to this, on the question of 3-party plugin compatibility - we also do have to produce a list of APIs the CDT provides along with their status (provisional/platform/etc) (see the BIRT release summary above for an example); doing this systematically should make it more clear as to the level of maturity and compatibility the different APIs provide. I'll do an initial list but would appreciate feedback/input into it.
Can I suggest we all get together on a conf call Monday (say at 1EST) to discuss the above and map out the closing of 3.0?
Thanks,
Sebastien |