Re: [rt-pmc] Planning Council

[Jesse McConnell <jesse.mcconnell@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 10:38, Wayne Beaton <wayne@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> This falls into EDP territory which is the domain of the Architecture
> Council.

hm, ok thanks

> The formal process is to open a bug against Community/Architecture Council.
>
> FWIW, the current rule is that you need a release review for any release
> that adds functionality. There is a bit of grey area in what constitutes
> "adds functionality" that is left to the discretion of the PMC.
> Generally this tends to mean additions or changes to established API.

adds functionality is a very nebulous line to draw, as is the change
to established API, particularly with a project like jetty

If we followed the traditional osgi packaging structure then I can
easily see what would constitute a change in API, anything that is not
under *internal* packaging.  We don't though and I don't foresee us
doing that ever, at least not until something like jetty9 would we see
any sort of change like that.  What we do now is if is something we
change is what we would commonly think an embedded user might use then
we basically minor rev it, 7.4 to 7.5 for instance because of some
changes to the session manager interfaces and abstract objects.  But
this isn't really new functionality so what I was hoping for was a
green light in terms of releasing 7.5 without having to do a full on
release docuware and review.  Now, if I get a couple of the CQ's
approved I am waiting on then I can see new functionality and a 7.5
that warranted a traditional release review.

Wayne, so based on that description would I be clear in releasing 7.5
without a release review unless I get the CQ's approved by then which
puts me in more traditional territory.  I think the switch from 7.2 to
7.3 or the one to 7.4 was a case like this.

cheers,
jesse

> On 07/22/2011 11:29 AM, Jesse McConnell wrote:
>> *bit tongue in cheek here*
>>
>> I know that Glyn is hot on the topic of tracking down specific release
>> requirements as they relate to rt projects..
>>
>> I want to bring up a proposal for modifying the requirements as
>> related to release reviews.  In a nutshell, I would like to provide
>> for projects like jetty such that we only need a release review when
>> there is a change in IPLOG as opposed to arbitrary minor version
>> increases like 7.4 to 7.5...
>>
>> in a week and a half is the first planning council meeting I'll attend
>> so perhaps I ought to not be the focus of discontent my very _first_
>> call but I figured I would toss out a mail to this list asking for
>> thought on
>>
>> a) is this even appropriate for the planning council
>>
>> b) is there a format for writing proposals to the planning council
>> that I haven't found/seen?
>>
>> c) is there anything other rt projects would like me to keep an eye on
>> with regards to this group?
>>
>> d) anything I ought to know? skeletons in the closet for key powerful
>> members I can use to bend them to our will? :)
>>
>> cheers,
>> jesse
>>
>> --
>> jesse mcconnell
>> jesse.mcconnell@xxxxxxxxx
>> _______________________________________________
>> rt-pmc mailing list
>> rt-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/rt-pmc
>
> --
> Wayne Beaton
> The Eclipse Foundation
> Twitter: @waynebeaton
>
> _______________________________________________
> rt-pmc mailing list
> rt-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/rt-pmc
>