[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [emf-dev] EMF 2.3.3 GA?

Hi Nick et al,

Going further off-topic...

When you're making comparisons to the platform policy, please don't forget that they still have the ability to produce fixes against their old streams even after their .2 maintenance release in February. As you know well, some of us need to be able to support our internal users for a lot longer than 8 months after release. We are the ones who originally chose to do all of our support in the maintenance stream, so if we're going to promptly close those streams, we'll need to have another way to provide support (i.e. to build patches based on closed releases).

Back on the topic at hand, I don't care at all about 2.3.3 at this point. I'm happy to wait for someone to actually ask for it or to just go ahead and release it for completeness' sake.


Dave Steinberg
Rational Software - IBM Toronto Lab

Inactive hide details for Nick Boldt ---11/07/2008 01:46:28 PM---I disagree. It just shows a maintenance branch that no one reaNick Boldt ---11/07/2008 01:46:28 PM---I disagree. It just shows a maintenance branch that no one really cares


Nick Boldt <nickboldt@xxxxxxxxx>


Eclipse Modelling Framework <emf-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>


11/07/2008 01:46 PM


Re: [emf-dev] EMF 2.3.3 GA?

I disagree. It just shows a maintenance branch that no one really cares
about, and an untended bit of releng work on my part that should have
been done this summer.


As to your off-topic request, wanting to do XSD 2.5 builds independent
of EMF 2.5 is one thing. Supporting maintenance branches from 2 years
ago is another kettle of funky fish, and I'd be VERY happy if the
official Modeling Project policy on maintenance aligned with what the
Eclipse Platform does: you get from June to February for maintenance;
after that, maintenance is closed so that the focus can be on new
development in the HEAD branch.

If you have a compelling customer need for why XSD has to be built
independent of EMF -- despite its pedigree of being a cross-project
build since its 1.x days, when the EMF project was in Tools and the XSD
project was in Technology -- please share it.

Then, since you appear to be bubbling over with spare time, please begin
the work required to split the XSD tests & examples from the EMF ones so
that there are no criss-crossing dependencies between the projects. XSD
can depend on EMF, or EMF on XSD, but for separate builds they cannot
both depend on each other. I'm not |33+ enough, or free-time-equipped
enough, to be able to do that work; nor do I see a compelling technical
or consumer reason for it. (Eclipse policies are meant to empower
customers, developers, and Member companies, not to introduce extra
administrivia for its own sake.)

When that's done, let me know and I'll re-evaluate the proposal to split
EMF and XSD into two builds.

'Till then,


Kenn Hussey wrote:
> This is case in point for the ability to do XSD builds/releases independently of EMF.
> Kenn Hussey
> Program Manager, Modeling and Design Solutions
> Embarcadero Technologies, Inc. |
> 82 Peter Street, Second Floor | Toronto, ON  M5V 2G5
> Kenn.Hussey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Office: 416-593-1585 x9296 Mobile: 613-301-9105
> -----Original Message-----
> From: emf-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [
mailto:emf-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Nick Boldt
> Sent: Friday, November 07, 2008 1:28 PM
> To: Eclipse Modelling Framework
> Subject: [emf-dev] EMF 2.3.3 GA?
> Guys,
> Back on 2008/03/12, we released an M build for EMF/XSD 2.3.3 to fix a
> single XSD bug. It's 8 months later and I guess no one has really been
> beating down the door for this fix, since we never released it in an R
> build.
> Is it time to do one simply to make the fix available to people who only
> watch the update sites, and to end the maintenance of EMF 2.3.x?
> I'd say yes -- any objections to spinning a final 2.3.3 GA next week?
> Nick

Nick Boldt ::
Release Engineer :: Eclipse Modeling & Dash CBI

emf-dev mailing list

GIF image

GIF image