Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Question on Kepler SR1 release review

HI

I missed this decision too and although it inconveniences me for SR1, I welcome it.

Arguably SR0 has the stronger constraint of the M6 API freeze and the M7 Feature freeze. I hope these will now become meaningful.

    Regards

        Ed Willink

On 15/08/2013 08:02, Igor Fedorenko wrote:
I certainly missed this decision (and no, as a small opensource project
m2e does not have "our" planning counsel representative).

Does the same "release one month prior to RC1" rule apply to SR0 in
June? If SR0 is treated differently, do you know/remember why?

--
Regards,
Igor

On 2013-08-14 7:39 PM, David M Williams wrote:
Its "new" as of last April.

And, by all means ... fix bugs and then submit a maintenance release for
final version (which would not need a "new release").

"Released", in this context, means the formal Eclipse process of having
been through the required release review which is always required of new
releases.




From: Doug Schaefer <dschaefer@xxxxxxx>
To: "cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx"
<cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>,
"cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx"
<cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>,
Date: 08/14/2013 11:33 AM
Subject: Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Question on Kepler SR1 release
review
Sent by: cross-project-issues-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
------------------------------------------------------------------------



Yeah actually that doesn't make sense. Why have the release sit around
for a month instead of fixing bugs in it right to the end of the SR?

Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone on the Rogers network.
*From: *Igor Fedorenko
*Sent: *Wednesday, August 14, 2013 11:24 AM
*To: *cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
*Reply To: *Cross project issues
*Subject: *Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Question on Kepler SR1 release
review



Is "new releases must be released a month before SR RC1" a new requirement?

--
Regards,
Igor

On 2013-08-14 6:53 PM, David M Williams wrote:
> I'll take this topic as a good segue to summarize Planning Council's
> view on "more frequent releases" and "including new features in SRs".
> I'll try to keep in brief, but anyone is welcome to read my full notes
> of meeting at _http://wiki.eclipse.org/Planning_Council/August_7_2013_
>
> First, it was recognized our "slow pace" was not satisfying all projects
> and adopters, but ...
> Second, it was satisfying most, so the short answer is status quo
> continues ... though we committed to continue the discussion for the
> long term. Its just that no one knew of any "easy answers" that could be
> implemented easily, without requiring more work from everyone.
>
> The "status quo" is captured in our current policy statement, at
>
_http://wiki.eclipse.org/SimRel/Simultaneous_Release_FAQ#Can_a_new_project_or_feature_join_a_Simultaneous_Service_Release_.28SR1_or_SR2.29.3F_
>
>
> In fact, it turns out several strategic adopting members were surprised > we allow new features at all ... and wanted the emphasis to stay on bug > fixes and quality improvements in the SRs, and to not "be surprised" by
> new features. So, we humbling ask projects to announce and summarize
> here on cross-project list when they are adding new features and when
> "minor" versions increment. We definitely want to allow projects to add
> new features when they need to, based on the needs of their community
> and adopters ... but don't want to encourage "experiments" with new
> features that might not be fully baked yet. So, we'll stick with the
> restrictions that "new releases" must be released a month before RC1 and
> "be in" RC1, as our policy states.
>
> This does not prevent any project from having a new release anytime you
> want .... but might mean you can not contribute it to "Simultaneous
> Release maintenance".
>
> Hope this helps adds clarity to the current rules for "Simultaneous
> Release maintenance".
>
> Thanks,
>
>
>
>
> From: Gunnar Wagenknecht <gunnar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: Cross project issues <cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>,
> Date: 08/14/2013 08:55 AM
> Subject: Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Question on Kepler SR1 release
> review
> Sent by: cross-project-issues-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
> Am 14.08.2013 um 02:41 schrieb Matthias Sohn <matthias.sohn@xxxxxxxxx>:
> > AFAIK if you want to release a pure maintenance release (only
> bugfixes, no new features)
> > you don't need a release review, if you want to ship new features you
> need the review.
>
> Yes, this is correct. Technically, a pure maintenance (aka. service)
> releases changes only the 'x' of 'a.b.x' version string.
>
> -Gunnar
>
> --
> Gunnar Wagenknecht
> gunnar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
> cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> _https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev_
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
> cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> _https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev_
>
_______________________________________________
cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org_
__https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev________________________________________________
cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev



_______________________________________________
cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev

_______________________________________________
cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev


-----
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2013.0.3392 / Virus Database: 3211/6576 - Release Date: 08/14/13





Back to the top