[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
[rt-pmc] LTS Readiness Criteria for Runtime Projects

Following the call that I alluded to earlier on whether Virgo, and RT projects more generally, need to participate in the simultaneous release in order to qualify for the LTS programme, the RT PMC have been asked to provide a list of the SR requirements that make no sense for runtime projects. To this end, Jesse and I, with help from Borislav Kapukaranov, have come up with the following proposed minimum list of simultaneous release requirements (taken from [1]) which we think are necessary for a runtime project to participate in LTS. Target Environments
1.2.4 Release Review and compliance to requirements documentation (RC3)
1.3 Extra requirements, to be in common repository - most, if not all, of these requirements seem necessary
1.4.5 Builds
1.4.6 Unit Tests
1.4.10 Retention Policy
1.4.12 Make it easy to get released source from repository

What do others think of this list?

To get the discussion started, I wonder if we should remove from the list 1.3.1 and 1.3.2 as these seem more relevant to the mechanics of running the simultaneous release and 1.3.5, 1.3.6, 1.3.7, and 1.3.8  as these seem more relevant to IDE projects.


Begin forwarded message:

From: "Bindewald, Jutta" <jutta.bindewald@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Virog in LTS (minutes)
Date: 25 September 2012 16:07:42 GMT+01:00

Minutes: Virgo in LTS (September, 25)
Participants: Karsten Schmidt, Jochen Krause, Glyn Normington, Andrew Ross, Boris Kapuaranov, Jesse McConnell, Thomas Rasteter,Jutta Bindewald
Problem: Runtime projects usually do not participate in the simultaneous release (SR) because SR consists of IDE components.
In the case of Virgo only a small subset belongs to SR.
After some discussion there was general agreement to extract the appropriate requirements from the SR requirement list to the LTS readiness definition instead of the existing  requirement that the project is released as part of SR.
There was a discussion if it makes sense to require in general that components in the LTS have to be bundles.
There was general agreement that also runtime projects shall be eligible to participate in LTS.
Next steps: The RT PMC provides a list of the SR requirements that make no sense for runtime projects. This list will be sent to the steering committee (Pat Huff, Jochen Krause, Thomas Rastetter and Paul  Lipton). The steering committee will in its first meeting planned for October attempt to discuss and potentially decide the Virgo case and enter into the general discussion about LTS readiness definition especially for runtime projects.
Dr. Jutta Bindewald
Development Manager
Tip CORE Java Infrastructure
Dietmar-Hopp-Allee 16
69190 Walldorf, Germany
T +49 6227 7-44183
F +49 6227 78-19277
M +49 151 168 10 354
E jutta.bindewald@xxxxxxx

Pflichtangaben/Mandatory Disclosure Statements: http://www.sap.com/company/legal/impressum.epx

Diese E-Mail kann Betriebs- oder Geschäftsgeheimnisse oder sonstige vertrauliche Informationen enthalten. Sollten Sie diese E-Mail irrtümlich erhalten haben, ist Ihnen eine Kenntnisnahme des Inhalts, eine Vervielfältigung oder Weitergabe der E-Mail ausdrücklich untersagt. Bitte benachrichtigen Sie uns und vernichten Sie die empfangene E-Mail. Vielen Dank. 

This e-mail may contain trade secrets or privileged, undisclosed, or otherwise confidential information. If you have received this e-mail in error, you are hereby notified that any review, copying, or distribution of it is strictly prohibited. Please inform us immediately and destroy the original transmittal. Thank you for your cooperation.