Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [orbit-dev] Orbit's Plan for Galileo SR1

I will need to consume a new version of SAT4J which improves the performance (https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=285949).

Inactive hide details for David M Williams ---08/19/2009 12:10:35 PM---There is at least one bundle (javax.activation) that hasDavid M Williams ---08/19/2009 12:10:35 PM---There is at least one bundle (javax.activation) that has changed from the


From:

David M Williams <david_williams@xxxxxxxxxx>

To:

Orbit Developer discussion <orbit-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>

Date:

08/19/2009 12:10 PM

Subject:

[orbit-dev] Orbit's Plan for Galileo SR1




There is at least one bundle (javax.activation) that has changed from the
last Recommended Build and should be in SR1:
https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=279519

Plus, I know the platform wants to include an important performance fix in
ICU bundle.

Are there any other changes that have to get into the Galileo maintenance
release?
If so, please list or point to bugs that explain why its of "maintenance
release importance" (you know, we don't have a formal policy in Orbit, but
normally only "major" bugs are worth the risk of changing things).



I'd like to tentatively propose that we produce an R-build on 8/26 ...
just a day or so before the Platform needs it for their SR1 RC2 build.
That way, it would be a true "release candidate" (as it should be).

The only problem is that the IP Staff has said they may not be able to
fit-in the IP review and approval by that 8/26 date.
So, I suggest we sort of build in "one week slip dates". That is, if by
8/26, the IP staff has not yet approved (and hence not in CVS, to build)
then we'd slip to the next date ... first 9/2, then 9/9. If not done by
then ... then, I don't think we could slip further. To summarize,
depending on when ICU gets approved and in a build:

Goal: 8/26
Fallback: 9/2
Final Chance: 9/9



What I would like to do, when we produce the R-build, is to just rename
whatever the latest I-build is at the time.

This would "pull in" 3 new bundles:

plugin@org.dojotoolkit,1.1.0=v200907071809
plugin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx,1.5.4=CVS,tag=v200908052355
plugin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.source,1.5.4=CVS,tag=v200908052355

But I don't think that's a problem for Orbit ... since we are just
producing a Recommended Build ... what actually goes into Galileo SR1 is
up to the Projects. Those three new ones (and the javax.activation bundle)
are the only changes since last R-build.

Does anyone have any better suggestions? Comments? Concerns? Anything else
need to be fixed/added in Orbit before SR1?



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


GIF image

GIF image


Back to the top