[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
[ecf-dev] ECF participation in the annual simultaneous release

Hi Folks,

ECF 3.13.1 was released on-time as part of the Neon Simultaneous Release. ECF has participated in all 11 Simultaneous Releases and has been an Eclipse Platform dependency (filetransfer for p2) for > 5 years. In that time we have met all SR requirements, met our all our commitments to Platform, and never been late. I think that's an incredible accomplishment and record for a small all-volunteer team.

Unfortunately, I think we are at a point where ECF's SR participation cannot continue. As project and Foundation requirements have steadily increased, the support for ECF (committer time) has decreased to the point where I as project lead cannot sustain SR participation because of my limited personal resources. As well, I now think that ECF gets far less from the SR than we put into it, and that inequity also can't continue. If the current resources situation doesn't somehow change substantively over the next few months, my intention is to withdraw ECF from the next SR.

Note this does not mean that ECF will slow down in our delivery to and support of our community. We have typically averaged > 4 releases per year, and I expect that will continue...and perhaps even increase. Non participation in the SR will only mean that I won't have to do all the work necessary for meeting the SR release requirements as well as doing the actual releases, and so will be able to concentrate on adding value in other ways...e.g. supporting the developer/Remote Services user community, doing more examples/tutorial/documentation, creating more distribution and discovery providers, recruiting, mentoring, and supporting ECF committers, and working on additional Eclipse-based tooling to make Remote Services/RSA development easier.

I wanted to bring this up early in the cycle so that this could be discussed in public via this list. If you have comments please feel free to make them either in response to this posting in public (preferred) or to me directly if you deem appropriate.

Thanks,

Scott