+1 for a one-time update.
Somewhere (Wiki?) we should document what projects put
what
versions into the update and why. Ideally that document
would
also have links to release
notes holding lists of bugs fixed for the
versions respectively. Comparing with the Europa
build-home CVS
version of Oct. 1st, it looks like the following
projects contributed:
Buckminster, DSDP-TM, DTP, ECF, EP, MDT-EODM,
MDT-UML2Tools, STP
To make a start for DSDP-TM, what we currently deliver to
Europa
is our build M20071030-2030 with build notes and bug lists
here:
26 bugs were fixed in 5 patched plugins out of 63
total
(4 critical fixes, 5 major, 11 lighter regressions, 6
other).
If we decide on an Europa FM+ release, I'd rename our
M-build to TM 2.0.1.1
in order to indicate the more official status.
And, BTW, I don't think we affect the EPP
packages.
Cheers,
--
Martin Oberhuber
Wind River Systems,
Inc.
Target Management Project Lead, DSDP PMC Member
http://www.eclipse.org/dsdp/tm
Europa Project Leads,
Please vote, on this mailing list, whether
we should be updating the Europa Update Site and the Europa download site with
the re-re-spin. It appears that individual projects have decided to update
their bits (that's fine) and the Europa download packages are being updated
(did we agree to that?), so perhaps we'd all better just vote +1 on this
re-re-spin for the Europa Fall Maintenance to be moved to be the main Europa
update site.
I'll take three or more +1s and no -1s by Friday morning
as a go.
@ALL: How do we proceed with the Europa Update Site content? From my point of
view there is too much confusion, no clear decision, no schedule, and no
green build at all.
P.S. The lack of a green build is that
annoying siteArchiver/update manager bug that corrupts pack200 files. The
non-packed files seem good and (when I get a moment) I'm working on the
work-around temp fix.
