Skip to main content
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [rt-pmc] LTS Readiness Criteria for Runtime Projects

We discussed this item for most of the RT-PMC call today.  I took some notes on the items we agreed on in the meeting minutes http://wiki.eclipse.org/RT/meetings/PMC_Minutes_121017

Please review the items we agreed do not apply to RT for LTS support and also review the remaining items which we do think apply from the simultaneous release requirements.  Bring up any concerns you have to the mailing list soon.  Glyn would like to take this feedback to the LTS committee soon.

Tom



Inactive hide details for Glyn Normington ---09/27/2012 06:21:26 AM---Following the call that I alluded to earlier on whether VGlyn Normington ---09/27/2012 06:21:26 AM---Following the call that I alluded to earlier on whether Virgo, and RT projects more generally, need

From: Glyn Normington <gnormington@xxxxxxxxxx>
To: Runtime Project PMC mailing list <rt-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx>,
Date: 09/27/2012 06:21 AM
Subject: [rt-pmc] LTS Readiness Criteria for Runtime Projects
Sent by: rt-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx




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.

1.2.2.1 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.

Regards,
Glyn
[1] http://wiki.eclipse.org/SimRel/Simultaneous_Release_Requirements

Begin forwarded message:
    From: "Bindewald, Jutta" <jutta.bindewald@xxxxxxx>
    Subject: Virog in LTS (minutes)
    Date: 25 September 2012 16:07:42 GMT+01:00
    To: "Bindewald, Jutta" <jutta.bindewald@xxxxxxx>, "Rastetter, Thomas" <thomas.rastetter@xxxxxxx>, "Schmidt, Karsten" <k.schmidt@xxxxxxx>, "'jkrause@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx'" <jkrause@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "'andrew.ross@xxxxxxxxxxx'" <andrew.ross@xxxxxxxxxxx>, "'gnormington@xxxxxxxxxx'" <gnormington@xxxxxxxxxx>, "'jesse.mcconnell@xxxxxxxxx'" <jesse.mcconnell@xxxxxxxxx>, "Kapukaranov, Borislav" <borislav.kapukaranov@xxxxxxx>

    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
    SAP AG
    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
    www.sap.com

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

GIF image

Back to the top