Re: [rt-pmc] Juno Retrospective

[Jesse McConnell <jesse.mcconnell@xxxxxxxxx>]

> Most Eclipse projects like the release train because it's the route to getting into the packages and thus exposure to millions of developers.

Perhaps we need some feedback on this because our experience has not
been this...we have only fielded a small handful of questions from
osgi users, much less osgi users consuming directly from the release
train repository.  Typically we see people surface with questions or
bugs and they have to be directed away from the release repository if
they want to try an updated package or fix.  I can only think of a
couple of questions in this direction though, one regarding a session
issue if I recall correctly.

> Why is that?

If I am trying to build a software stack for my product, I want to
carefully choose what goes into it, not have everything pre-determined
for me and locked into specific versions of things.  The eclipse
release repo represents a static point in time which does not evolve,
it just gets a new static point in time.  That is maybe a valid
approach for folks working on a UI or the like, but for a server stack
it is less attractive.

> What would a fantastic release train process for RT look like?

Well, something that evolves more like maven central and lets you have
access to what you need in one place over time, letting you adjust the
version for bundle A without effecting B and C in your stack.

> What would be the right incentives for the RT projects to _want_ to be in the release train?

IMO users (for building a server stack oriented project) want a place
they can go to that they are able to get what they need, and if we
release a bugfix for something then I shouldn't have to change their
build or point at news other places to get updates...I should just be
able to tell my build or versioning system to give me that new version
for the fix.

For the record, I am not poopooing the idea of the eclipse release
train, I am just saying for that server side components it is largely
a different landscape.  We have had many discussions to this effect on
the RT-PMC conference calls over the years.

cheers,
jesse

--
jesse mcconnell
jesse.mcconnell@xxxxxxxxx


On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 10:34 AM, Mike Milinkovich
<mike.milinkovich@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Since I sort of started this thread, I just want to point out that it has
> gone in an unintended direction. At least from my perspective.
>
> I didn't intend this retrospective conversation to be about Jetty's
> decision. I would like to understand (or more accurately make sure that the
> RT community understands) why the release train concept is unattractive to
> the RT community, and if there is anything which can be done about it.
> Ideally, I would love to see some thinking outside the box.
>
> Most Eclipse projects like the release train because it's the route to
> getting into the packages and thus exposure to millions of developers.
> Apparently, there is little similar incentive here. Why is that? What would
> a fantastic release train process for RT look like? What would be the right
> incentives for the RT projects to _want_ to be in the release train?
> Obviously no one wants to do extra work, unless there is a tangible benefit.
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: rt-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:rt-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On
>> Behalf Of Gunnar Wagenknecht
>> Sent: August-23-12 4:09 AM
>> To: Hugues Malphettes
>> Cc: Runtime Project PMC mailing list
>> Subject: Re: [rt-pmc] Juno Retrospective
>>
>> Am 23.08.2012 08:40, schrieb Hugues Malphettes:
>> > What do you think?
>> > Would it be acceptable to only contribute the jetty bundles to the
> train?
>> > Is it something that will make everyone more comfortable?
>>
>> +1 I'd love to see the Jetty bundles continue to be available in the
>> common repo. From my point of view it would be sufficient to simply
>> point the aggregator to a composite repo of a desired release stream
>> (eg. 8.x or 9.x). Thus, not a lot maintenance overhead is put on you and
>> releases are automatically picked up.
>>
>> -Gunnar
>>
>> --
>> Gunnar Wagenknecht
>> gunnar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> http://wagenknecht.org/
>> _______________________________________________
>> rt-pmc mailing list
>> rt-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/rt-pmc
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> rt-pmc mailing list
> rt-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/rt-pmc