Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [ecf-dev] ECF Kepler Status

I'm not quite sure how to take this.

Are you asking how you can avoid alerting my attention to the fact that you may be trying to circumvent the process by issuing a bogus service release?

Wayne

On 05/23/2013 05:23 PM, Wim Jongman wrote:
Wayne can you please tell us your google alert words so that we can avoid those in the future?

Thanks

Wim


On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 7:04 PM, Wayne Beaton <wayne@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
There is no specific rule.

Service releases are--by definition--bug fix releases. Breaking APIs goes beyond bug fixing and so warrants an opinion from the PMC.

Wayne


On 05/23/2013 12:56 PM, Scott Lewis wrote:

Markus...since you are the ECF rep on the RT PMC, and this is a change you requested, would you please bring up before the PMC/on the mailing list? (or some other way if you prefer)

Question to Wayne:   Is there some particular requirement to bring up such things before PMC (as opposed to the ECF community)?   I've not seen that necessarily done by other RT projects.

Thanks,

Scott


On 5/23/2013 9:44 AM, Wayne Beaton wrote:
Please ask the PMC's opinion.

Thanks,

Wayne

On 05/23/2013 12:38 PM, Scott Lewis wrote:
On 5/23/2013 9:33 AM, Wayne Beaton wrote:
API breakage doesn't sound like a "service" release.

It wasn't expected/intended:

https://bugs.eclipse.org/408034

But after discussion and notification [1], we decided to go ahead with it for 3.6.1.

Scott

[1] http://dev.eclipse.org/mhonarc/lists/ecf-dev/msg06298.html



Wayne

On 05/23/2013 12:15 PM, Scott Lewis wrote:
On 5/23/2013 4:50 AM, Wim Jongman wrote:
Congratulations guys. Good work.

with respect to the maintenance release, 3.6.1. Since there is API breakage, and there is now TCK compliance. Would it not be better to go for 4.0.0?

For the Kepler release (3.6.1), it's too late to shift to 4.0.0. For major release increments we have to schedule, produce review materials, and have a release review with the EF...and it's far too late for that.

As well, because of '1' below...for filetranser and core our 3.6.1 release version already in the platform.

For our next release (whenever that is), we could do 4.0.0...but I would prefer that we get more/other new stuff in to justify that.

Scott



_______________________________________________
ecf-dev mailing list
ecf-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ecf-dev


--
Wayne Beaton
Director of Open Source Projects, The Eclipse Foundation
Learn about Eclipse Projects
EclipseCon France 2013


_______________________________________________
ecf-dev mailing list
ecf-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ecf-dev



_______________________________________________
ecf-dev mailing list
ecf-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ecf-dev

--
Wayne Beaton
Director of Open Source Projects, The Eclipse Foundation
Learn about Eclipse Projects
EclipseCon France 2013


_______________________________________________
ecf-dev mailing list
ecf-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ecf-dev



_______________________________________________
ecf-dev mailing list
ecf-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ecf-dev

--
Wayne Beaton
Director of Open Source Projects, The Eclipse Foundation
Learn about Eclipse Projects
EclipseCon France 2013

_______________________________________________
ecf-dev mailing list
ecf-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ecf-dev




_______________________________________________
ecf-dev mailing list
ecf-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ecf-dev

--
Wayne Beaton
Director of Open Source Projects, The Eclipse Foundation
Learn about Eclipse Projects
EclipseCon
          France 2013

Back to the top