RE: [cdt-dev] CDT 3.0 Closing

[Thomas Fletcher <ThomasF@xxxxxxx>]

Unfortunately I'm away from the machine containing the What's New ... but
if you check the archives there is a version there.  

I'll send the latest copy in the next couple of days.

Thomas 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx 
> [mailto:cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of David Daoust
> Sent: July 26, 2005 7:00 AM
> To: Chetan Raj; CDT General developers list.
> Subject: Re: [cdt-dev] CDT 3.0 Closing
> 
> 
> There will be a What's new document for CDT 3.0 soon.   In 
> the meantime, check the CDT 3.0 development plan, or bugzilla 
> to see which defects have been addressed . 
> 
> If 3.0 is not as stable as 2.1.1 for you, please raise 
> defects on the problems.    In general the committers have 
> the belief that 3.0 is much more stable than 2.0 (other than 
> the C++ browsing perspective). 
> 
> You are free to remain on any release that works for you.   
> Obviously the upgrade decision should be based on your 
> ability to use the software to accomplish your goals :-)    I 
> would suggest that everybody move to 3.0 and provide feedback 
> on its shortcomings -- otherwise CDT will not get any better 
> for your purposes. 
> 
> There are no plans to make CDT 2.X run on Eclipse 3.1 
> 
>         - Dave 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Chetan Raj <hichetu@xxxxxxxxx>
> Sent by: cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx 
> 
> 07/26/2005 03:14 AM
> Please respond to
> Chetan Raj and "CDT General developers list."
> 
> To
> cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> cc
> Subject
> Re: [cdt-dev] CDT 3.0 Closing
> 
> 	
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What are the major features added to CDT 3.0 ?
> 
> Considering that CDT 3.0 is not yet stable as CDT 2.1.1,  can 
> we remain with CDT 2.1.1 without losing much of improvements 
> in the new version? OR do you suggest to move on to 3.0 
> beacause 2.1.1 does not work on Eclipse 3.1?
> 
> Is there any plan to release CDT 2.2 which can be run on Eclipse 3.1?
> 
> Thanks,
> Chetan
> 
> On 7/26/05, Sumit Sarkar <sumit.sarkar@xxxxxxxxx 
> <mailto:sumit.sarkar@xxxxxxxxx> > wrote: 
> What's the new release date for CDT 3.0?
> 
> Thanks,
> sumit 
> 
> 
> On 7/26/05, Sebastien Marineau < sebastien@xxxxxxx 
> <mailto:sebastien@xxxxxxx> > wrote: 
> Hi folks,
> 
> Here's a summary of the call today and closing items for 3.0:
> 
> 1. Remaining open defects
> 
> Moved to future:
> 53174 - will be moved to future
> 82077 - will be moved to future, investigate the windows handle leak
> 83566 - move to future
> 
> Look at fixing by Wedneday:
> 10929 - Mikhail will look at a possible fix
> 92446 - defect reopened today; Alain will assess and fix (if 
> possible) by Wednesday
> 100992 - Constructor/destructor breakpoints, Alain and JohnC 
> will look at a fix for this
> 
> Gating:
> 104421 - all agreed this has to be fixed for 3.0. It will 
> require a change to CDI. Mikhail and Alain will work on 
> addressing this. Mikhail will also send out the proposed CDI 
> interface change for review. 
> 102195 - Due to serious issues, the sugestion to disable the 
> C++ browsing perspective and type hierarchy for 3.0, and 
> revisit/rework for 3.1. We will send out another email to 
> discuss the impact of this.
> 
> 2. EPL and IP
> 
> On the EPL front, we are now clean and all shipping code has 
> been relicensed. On the IP front, we need to do a review of 
> the contributors (patch/feature submitters). I will send a 
> list to the mailing list for review.
> 
> 3. Docs
> 
> The cutoff for the doc updates is August 12th. IBM will be 
> done all their doc review and updates by Wednesday (27th). 
> Intel will be polishing the MBS docs (user and extensibility 
> doc) in the next 2 weeks. QNX will be doing reviews of the 
> docs and has offered to gather additional input/content for inclusion.
> 
> 4. Testing
> 
> James Tan requested that we allot a few days for testing of 
> the final RC to ensure we get more coverage and depth. It was 
> also suggested others who are doing 3.0 testing state their 
> intentions on the mailing list.
> 
> 5. Quality
> 
> Core (with the exception noted above), Debug and MBS are all 
> happy with the quality of 3.0 and the 
> improvements/scalability/bugfixes made over 2.1.1.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Sebastien
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> cdt-dev mailing list
> cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx> 
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev 
> <https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev>  
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> cdt-dev mailing list
> cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx> 
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev 
> <https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> cdt-dev mailing list
> cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev
> 
> 
>