Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [eclipse.org-planning-council] Next meeting, and some items to decide before next meeting

I really like the naming Anthony suggested. 

The problem is that Mars 16.02 is not "major increment" and some may view it that way (the 16.02 vs 15.09). However, with the prefix Mars this may help. After Mars 16.02 we have  Neon16.06.

Cheers,
Ian

On Mon, Jul 20, 2015 at 11:51 AM, Anthony Hunter <anthonyh@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Mars 15.06 , Mars 15.09 and Mars 16.02

Cheers...
Anthony


Inactive hide details for Daniel Megert ---2015/07/20 11:21:30 AM---This is really to subtle/geekish ;-)  DaniDaniel Megert ---2015/07/20 11:21:30 AM---This is really to subtle/geekish ;-) Dani

From: Daniel Megert <daniel_megert@xxxxxxxxxx>
To: Eclipse Planning Council private list <eclipse.org-planning-council@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: 2015/07/20 11:21 AM
Subject: Re: [eclipse.org-planning-council] Next meeting, and some items to decide before next meeting
Sent by: eclipse.org-planning-council-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx





This is really to subtle/geekish ;-)

Dani



From:
Doug Schaefer <dschaefer@xxxxxxx>
To:
Eclipse Planning Council private list <eclipse.org-planning-council@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date:
20.07.2015 17:18
Subject:
Re: [eclipse.org-planning-council] Next meeting, and some items to decide before next meeting
Sent by:
eclipse.org-planning-council-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx




That’s why I proposed Mars.1, not Mars 1. The dot implies an increment on the Mars release.

From:
<eclipse.org-planning-council-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx> on behalf of Ian Bull <irbull@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-To:
Eclipse Planning Council <eclipse.org-planning-council@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date:
Monday, July 20, 2015 at 11:14 AM
To:
Eclipse Planning Council <eclipse.org-planning-council@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject:
Re: [eclipse.org-planning-council] Next meeting, and some items to decide before next meeting

+1 for not increasing version numbers. I assume we are not taking about 'plugins / features' but rather the .product files. However, I don't think we should increase them just because. If EPP provides API itself, that should be versioned properly.

As for names, I'm fine with Mars 1 and Mars 2, but are we sure we like the 0 offset thing? Is Mars 1 the first release (the one that happened in June) or does Mars 1 come second, in September? Will this confuse anyone?

Cheers,
Ian

On Mon, Jul 20, 2015 at 9:46 AM, Daniel Megert <daniel_megert@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
+1. We shouldn't abuse the terms and only increase when appropriate.

Dani



From:
Ed Merks <ed.merks@xxxxxxxxx>
To:
eclipse.org-planning-council@xxxxxxxxxxx
Date:
18.07.2015 05:18
Subject:
Re: [eclipse.org-planning-council] Next meeting, and some items to decide before next meeting
Sent by:
eclipse.org-planning-council-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx




Max,

You're scaring me. One only bumps the major version of a bundle/feature if one actually breaks API, and many if not most downstream bundles specify an upper bound that excludes major version increments for exactly that reason. As such major version increments imply incompatibility and downstream pain, which is of course not a good message at all. In other words, version numbers are not a marketing message:

https://wiki.eclipse.org/Version_Numbering

David,

I think the "minor" wording doesn't actually improve anything, especially given that some projects will do minor releases and some will do service releases. Note how Max is assuming that the June release is therefore a major release...

Maybe it's best to continue to focus on terminology that reflects what the base platform is doing. Will they be doing service releases or minor releases?



On 18/07/2015 2:32 AM, Max Rydahl Andersen wrote:

On point #1.


If we go and call it a minor release - should we also actually bump the minor version of the epp packages ?

And by implication bump major every year ?


Note - none of this should imply anyone inside the release train must break Api just that it is a possibility but we encourage keep things backwards compatible.

I personally think that would be a good message to send.


But interested in hearing arguments for/against it ?

/max

http://about.me/maxandersen


On 17 Jul 2015, at 13:50, David M Williams <
david_williams@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

We are not meeting again until August 5, See https://wiki.eclipse.org/Planning_Council/August_05_2015

But, there are two items for you to consider before then, and ideally come to agreement. I am thinking they are not controversial, and we can document agreement via this list by next week (7/24). But, if they are controversial, we can discuss at August meeting.

1. One "todo" we have is to change the mis-perception that "new things can go into Simultaneous Release repository only once per year".
I think one thing we can do, even for Mars, is to officially change the name of September and February release. Currently called "Service Release", it has been many years since that has been true, and the only reason we haven't changed the name is because we could not think of a better one. It was suggested at previous meeting (thanks Max) that "Minor Release" would be appropriate.

So, I'd like to formally propose to change the name to "Minor Release" (even for Mars) and change "SR" abbreviations to "MR" the few places it is used. I do not think the "rules" change over what is currently documented in our Policy FAQ. I suppose that "policy" should be moved into the Plan itself, since the Policy FAQ is not easy to find.

Please indicate thumbs up or thumbs down, here to Planning Council list. If there is disagreement, please be concrete as to why, and perhaps propose alternatives. We can have more discussion at August meeting, if needed, but I think to make a change like that, as early as possible would be better.

2. Another "todo" is the agree to a Neon Simultaneous Release Plan.
While there is still a lot of work to do on the plan, as a whole, the thing I'd like to get immediate agreement for is that the first 4 milestones would be similar in duration and dates than in previous years. (M4 is in mid-December, 2015). See Neon Simultaneous Release Plan for details. That would give individual projects (and us) something concrete to plan for in near future, while we work out details of having more "Minor Releases" for Neon.

Again, please indicate thumbs up or thumbs down, here to this list, and feel free to say if anyone thinks that is an invalid "initial plan".

Thanks,







_______________________________________________

eclipse.org-planning-council mailing list

eclipse.org-planning-council@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse.org-planning-council

IMPORTANT: Membership in this list is generated by processes internal to the Eclipse Foundation. To be permanently removed from this list, you must contact
emo@xxxxxxxxxxx to request removal.


_______________________________________________
eclipse.org-planning-council mailing list

eclipse.org-planning-council@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse.org-planning-council

IMPORTANT: Membership in this list is generated by processes internal to the Eclipse Foundation. To be permanently removed from this list, you must contact
emo@xxxxxxxxxxx to request removal.
_______________________________________________
eclipse.org-planning-council mailing list
eclipse.org-planning-council@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse.org-planning-council

IMPORTANT: Membership in this list is generated by processes internal to the Eclipse Foundation. To be permanently removed from this list, you must contact emo@xxxxxxxxxxx to request removal.

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

IMPORTANT: Membership in this list is generated by processes internal to the Eclipse Foundation. To be permanently removed from this list, you must contact emo@xxxxxxxxxxx to request removal.



--
R. Ian Bull | EclipseSource Victoria | +1 250 477 7484
http://eclipsesource.com | http://twitter.com/eclipsesource_______________________________________________
eclipse.org-planning-council mailing list
eclipse.org-planning-council@xxxxxxxxxxx

https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse.org-planning-council

IMPORTANT: Membership in this list is generated by processes internal to the Eclipse Foundation.  To be permanently removed from this list, you must contact emo@xxxxxxxxxxx to request removal.
_______________________________________________
eclipse.org-planning-council mailing list
eclipse.org-planning-council@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse.org-planning-council

IMPORTANT: Membership in this list is generated by processes internal to the Eclipse Foundation.  To be permanently removed from this list, you must contact emo@xxxxxxxxxxx to request removal.



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

IMPORTANT: Membership in this list is generated by processes internal to the Eclipse Foundation.  To be permanently removed from this list, you must contact emo@xxxxxxxxxxx to request removal.



--
R. Ian Bull | EclipseSource Victoria | +1 250 477 7484
http://eclipsesource.com | http://twitter.com/eclipsesource

Back to the top