[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
|
[wtp-pmc] FW: [eclipse.org-committers] Eclipse project reviews
|
Just when you thought it was safe…time
to get the “external” release review slidedeck ready. We should
deliver these to Anne this Wednesday (June 14th). They are just a
slightly extended version of what you prepared for the internal reviews plus a
few boilerplate slides.
Here’s the format I would suggest
(each bullet point is one slide) based on previous reviews and community Q&A.
Feel free to modify – my one piece of advice is not to spend a lot of
time making it longer, as these reviews can be rather perfunctory. If you have
questions about the format or content, let me know. There may also be some
suggestions for Dali coming out of Monday’s review. We can also discuss
at the PMC call Tuesday morning, and in addition to sending the decks to Anne,
you should also submit them to the PMC for review prior to the public call –
minor edits between the deck you give Anne and the final version are ok.
- What:
- Overview
statement of what the project is/does
- This
is a pre-1.0 technology release review timed to coincide with WTP’s
1.5
- The
material will be made available for download on top of the 3.2 / 1.5
platforms via WTP’s download site and update manager (separate from
1.5)
- Who:
- Overview
of the committers/contributors/companies involved.
- Brief
description of outreach/development of larger community:
- Meetings
posted
- Telecons
held
- PMC
calls participated in (e.g., WTP’s)
- Use
of mailing lists, newsgroups, etc. I.e., you’re a good citizen and
you’re transparent/permeable.
- Presentations
given, conferences attended (summary)
- List
of recent reviews (move review, internal/WTP review, etc.)
- When:
Release schedule, including recent milestones, release date, a few
speculative future milestones and the rough features delivered in each. Statement
of current status, relationship to WTP builds, etc.
- Feature
overview
- Standards
supported
- IP
review. Something like the following boilerplate (and let’s verify
with Janet that we’re not fibbing ;-)
- About
files and license files are complete and correct?: Yes
- All
significant and third-party contributions have been reviewed by Eclipse
Legal? Yes: See project log for
complete list
- Project
log complete and has been reviewed by Eclipse Legal? Yes
- The
URL is http://www.eclipse.org/webtools/development/ip_log.html
- (Provisional)
API overview
- All
your APIs are provisional because this is a pre-1.0 release
- Rough
statement of where/what those APIs are
- If
you like, speculate on future growth areas for API (provisional or
otherwise) or timing of provisional à real
API
- Also
state explicitly that there are no end-of-life issues before there is no
API yet.
- Documentation
status
- Testing
status
- JUnit
test summary statement
- Include
open and resolved-but-not-closed bug counts
From: eclipse.org-committers-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:eclipse.org-committers-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Anne Jacko
Sent: Tuesday, May 30, 2006 8:55
PM
To:
eclipse.org-committers@xxxxxxxxxxx; eclipse.org-membership-at-large@xxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: janet.campbell@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [eclipse.org-committers]
Eclipse project reviews
Hello all,
The following reviews are taking place in the next few weeks. The conference
call numbers are below.
Conference bridge:
866-362-7064
or
613-287-8000
passcode 874551#
|
_______________________________________________
eclipse.org-committers mailing list
eclipse.org-committers@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse.org-committers
