We don't need to have separate bugs for MWE. It's ok to have the bugzillas from emft-releng.
Sven On Oct 31, 2008, at 11:55 AM, Richard Gronback wrote: OK, thanks. This means we have the following Bugzilla Product-Components to include so far: GMF-Releng EMF-Releng M2T-Jet M2T-MTL M2T-Xpand MDT-Releng TMF-Xtext EMFT-MWE Ed, care to manage the EMF/EMFT components as Kenn is doing in MDT? Having just EMF-Releng and EMFT-Releng contributions might be best. - Rich On 10/30/08 4:20 PM, "Kenn Hussey" <Kenn.Hussey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: While I’d like to delegate the work to individual component leads, I’m OK with waiting for a +1 from each of the contributing component/sub-project leads before resolving bugs at the MDT level (we can always assign the bugs to component leads to get their attention). So for MDT, I’d like to go for one set of bugs for MDT (Releng component is fine). Cheers, Kenn Hussey Program Manager, Modeling and Design Solutions <image.jpg> <http://www.embarcadero.com/> Embarcadero Technologies, Inc. | www.embarcadero.com <http://www.embarcadero.com/> 82 Peter Street, Second Floor | Toronto, ON M5V 2G5 Kenn.Hussey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:Kenn.Hussey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Office: 416-593-1585 x9296 Mobile: 613-301-9105 From: modeling-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:modeling-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Richard Gronback Sent: Thursday, October 30, 2008 3:55 PM To: PMC members mailing list Subject: Re: [modeling-pmc] FW: [eclipse.org-planning-council] Where would youlike your Galileo bugs? Thanks, Christian. I agree, that would not be a bad approach. The hope regarding components is that the “I’m a project now, not a component” feature of the portal will be available in the next (OK, like 6) months, which means having them separate now may mean not having to create a bunch later. Plus, I suspect Kenn will want to delegate to each component the responsibility of maintaining these train bugs. I guess it’s best left up to the Project Lead to determine what’s best for their project. Best, Rich On 10/30/08 3:49 PM, "Christian W. Damus" <cdamus@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: Hi, Rich, If I were a PMC member, I would vote for project-level bugs (EMF, GMF, M2M, M2T, MDT, etc.) and implement a checklist of the components in each. As components implement the requirement of a bug, they add their checkmarks. When all components are accounted for, the bug is resolved. Nick has implemented this strategy in a number of cross-component releng bugs, and it has always worked well. Cheers, Christian On 30-Oct-08, at 3:17 PM, Richard Gronback wrote: Hello, In case you’ve not followed the Planning Council discussion on this year’s train participation requirements, we’re going to track requirements using Bugzilla. The approach is to create a bug for each requirement, then clone each for each train participant with a dependency on the “master.” So the question is, what level of granularity do we want in Modeling on these bugs? Keep in mind, it’s like 20 bugs for each participant you’ll get by signing up. If we go by our .sc file list last year in Ganymede, it means we’ll need: EMF EMF-CDO EMF-Net4j EMF-Query EMF-Teneo EMF-Transaction EMF-Validation EMFT-Compare EMFT-EcoreTools EMFT-Mint EMFT-Search GMF M2M-ATL M2M-QVTOML M2T-JET MDT-OCL MDT-UML2 MDT-UML2Tools MDT-XSD I’m not sure if TMF is expecting to be on the train, so Sven/Frederic please let us know. Also, if any others are planning to join, please pre-announce your intent now (although technically you have until M4). Thanks, Rich ------ Forwarded Message From: Bjorn Freeman-Benson <bjorn.freeman-benson@xxxxxxxxxxx> Organization: Eclipse Foundation Inc. Reply-To: "eclipse.org-planning-council" <eclipse.org-planning-council@xxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2008 10:54:23 -0700 To: "eclipse.org-planning-council" <eclipse.org-planning-council@xxxxxxxxxxx> Subject: [eclipse.org-planning-council] Where would you like your Galileo bugs? Galileo Leads, I am creating all the cloned Galileo bugs as per our discussion at EclipseWorld. Before I do, I'd like to know where you want me to put the bugs for your project(s). Here is the table I have so far: Project Classification Product Component Buckminster Tools Buckminster internal-build CDT Tools CDT cdt-releng DLTK Technology DLTK Common DSDP DD DSDP DD General DSDP TM DSDP Target Management Core DTP DataTools releng ECF RT ECF ecf.core Platform Eclipse Platform Releng Equinox RT Equinox Framework EMF Modeling EMF Releng EMFT Modeling EMFT Releng EPP Technology EPP installer GEF Tools GEF releng GMF Modeling GMF Releng MDT Modeling MDT Releng M2M Modeling M2M Releng M2T Modeling M2T Releng TMF Modeling TMF Releng Mylyn Tools Mylyn Core RAP Technology RAP Workbench STP STP build.system Subversive Technology Subversive Core TPTP TPTP TPTP Release Engineering Build WTP WebTools Web Tools General Rich, Ed, If you'd like the modeling sub-sub-projects to have their own set of cloned bugs, please let me know which sub-sub-projects and which bugzilla component to file them under - thanks. - Bjorn -- New Page 1 [end of message] _______________________________________________ modeling-pmc mailing list modeling-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/modeling-pmc
|