RE: [cdt-dev] FW: Proposal for Release Schedules

[Thomas Fletcher <ThomasF@xxxxxxx>]

+1 for a release date that is not after June 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx 
> [mailto:cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Doug Schaefer
> Sent: November 10, 2005 7:26 PM
> To: CDT General developers list.
> Subject: [cdt-dev] FW: Proposal for Release Schedules
> 
> Yes closing off mid-April is what I had in mind. I think with 
> our current numbers, we should have an easier time being more 
> disciplined at meeting that goal. In the past we've always 
> over committed and we didn't have a project lead that made 
> sure we had plans and stuck with them (sorry Sebastien :-)). 
> Having been a development manager in a recent past life, I 
> promise I'll bring those skills back and make sure we deliver 
> on our promises.
> 
>  
> 
> I'm not stuck with the version name and I don't think any 
> other projects are lining up. Calling the June release 3.1 
> works for me.
> 
>  
> 
> My biggest concern is that if we let 3.1 drift past the end 
> of June, then vacation season kicks in and I didn't like how 
> that went last year and it actually delayed us a month. And 
> from what Erich Gamma says, this is also the biggest reason 
> the platform releases then.
> 
>  
> 
> Thanks, Leo, great feedback,
> Doug
> 
>  
> 
> ________________________________
> 
> From: 
> Sent: None
> Subject: 
> 
>  
> 
> That does make the discussion more interesting...  What I think 
> you are suggesting is that our release plan be:
> 
>  
> 
> *	A 3.0.2 maintenance release in Feb, 2006
> *	A functionality release lined up with the Platform 3.2 
> release at the end of June, 2006.  It could be named 3.1 or 
> 3.2 or even 4.0.
> 
>  
> 
> > but it would give us two and a half months for our release 
> candidate 
> > cycle
> 
>  
> 
> Are you suggesting that we have a feature complete - 
> development freeze milestone in mid-April?  I would agree to 
> that, but it might take a little more "discipline"  ;-)  than 
> we have displayed in the past.
> 
>  
> 
> Regarding the version name, I'm not sure that it is worth 
> trying to line up release numbers.  For example, in the 
> future we may decide to have a "major change" release that 
> needs to be called 4.0 before the Platform does.
> 
>  
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Leo
> 
>  
> 
> ________________________________
> 
> From: cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx 
> [mailto:cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Doug Schaefer
> Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2005 12:50 PM
> To: CDT General developers list.
> Subject: RE: [cdt-dev] Proposal for Release Schedules
> 
>  
> 
> To add a little fuel to the fire, Eclipse has released their 
> full milestone schedule for 3.2.
> 
> *    Friday Aug. 12, 2005 - Milestone 1 (3.2 M1) - stable build 
> 
> *    Friday Sep. 23, 2005 - Milestone 2 (3.2 M2) - stable build 
> 
> *    Friday Nov. 4, 2005 - Milestone 3 (3.2 M3) - stable build 
> 
> *    Friday Dec. 16, 2005 - Milestone 4 (3.2 M4) - stable build 
> 
> *    (new)Friday Feb. 17, 2006 - Milestone 5 (3.2 M5) - 
> stable build - API complete - API freeze 
> 
> *    (new)Friday Mar. 31, 2006 - Milestone 6 (3.2 M6) - 
> stable build - feature complete - development freeze - lock 
> down and testing begins 
> 
> Now if I read that correctly, that gives them a three month 
> release candidate cycle. That should actually give us enough 
> time to release the CDT at the end of June on the same day as 
> the platform. I think we still need two weeks after every 
> milestone to adopt any changes, but it would give us two and 
> a half months for our release candidate cycle.
> 
>  
> 
> How does that sit with everyone, especially those with 
> product plans for the CDT next year? That would really mean 
> that we couldn't do anything significant for a Feb CDT 
> release making it a 3.0.2.
> 
>  
> 
> But then what do we call the CDT release. I liked lining up 
> the version numbers.
> 
>  
> 
> Doug
> 
>  
> 
> ________________________________
> 
> From: cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx 
> [mailto:cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Treggiari, Leo
> Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2005 9:49 AM
> To: CDT General developers list.
> Subject: RE: [cdt-dev] Proposal for Release Schedules
> 
>  
> 
> >So my proposal is this: move HEAD to Eclipse 3.2, which 
> requires some code changes due to API changes in the abstract 
> editor and allows us to start working towards any new APIs 
> that are coming (e.g. debug). Use the cdt_3_0 stream for the 
> next release towards the end of Feb.
> 
>  
> 
> I agree.  
> 
> +1
> 
>  
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Leo
> 
>  
> 
> ________________________________
> 
> From: cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx 
> [mailto:cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Doug Schaefer
> Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2005 9:41 AM
> To: CDT General developers list.
> Subject: [cdt-dev] Proposal for Release Schedules
> 
>  
> 
> Hey gang,
> 
>  
> 
> We talked about this at this month's conference call and I'd 
> like to get the community's input and call for a vote on this.
> 
>  
> 
> Essentially, we want to avoid triple streaming. We have a 
> need to move to Eclipse 3.2 before API freeze happens next 
> month to validate that we are happy with any API changes 
> (which we aren't but kind of lost that first battle). We are 
> also considering maintenance work on the CDT 3.0.x stream for 
> the Jan timeframe. And finally, we have some sizable changes 
> that we had considered for a CDT 3.1 for Feb/Mar.
> 
>  
> 
> I think this is a little too much release activity for the 
> number of committers we have working on the CDT today, and 
> the consensus on call was that this was that we should 
> probably only have one release in the Feb-ish timeframe. What 
> we haven't figured out if there will be enough content to 
> call it a 3.1 or if it could be a 3.0.2. But we can work that 
> out as we go.
> 
>  
> 
> So my proposal is this: move HEAD to Eclipse 3.2, which 
> requires some code changes due to API changes in the abstract 
> editor and allows us to start working towards any new APIs 
> that are coming (e.g. debug). Use the cdt_3_0 stream for the 
> next release towards the end of Feb.
> 
>  
> 
> Toughts?
> 
> Doug
> 
>  
> 
> ------
> 
> Attachments are virus free!
> 
> 
> This message has been scanned for viruses at the originating end by
> 
> Nemx Anti-Virus for MS Exchange Server/IMC
> 
>         http://www.nemx.com/products/antivirus
> 
> 
> ------
> 
> Attachments are virus free!
> 
> 
> This message has been scanned for viruses at the originating end by
> 
> Nemx Anti-Virus for MS Exchange Server/IMC
> 
>         http://www.nemx.com/products/antivirus
> 
> 
>