From: cross-project-issues-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:cross-project-issues-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of John Arthorne
Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2007 4:41
PM
To: Cross
project issues
Subject: RE:
[cross-project-issues-dev] Re-spin process / DSDP-TM Re-spin request
It becomes a bit of a self-fulfilling prophesy. If
consumers decide that the June release is a beta, then they may wait even later
before consuming it, and those integration failures are not discovered until
later still. We have plenty of betas in Eclipse - continuously in fact. Most
projects have builds every day, integration builds every week, and stable
builds every 6-8 weeks. Europa as a whole also had betas (milestones) every six
weeks in the months leading up to the release. Maybe the whole release cycle
moves too fast to leave time for thorough integration testing, but I'm sure
there would be plenty of unhappy people if we released less often. Such is life
in software: our users want a stable product with all the desired features, and
they want it yesterday ;)
I
agree with the general point though: there is certainly room for improvement in
cross-project intregration testing. Having milestone builds of EPP
packages to go with the update site milestones would be a great start.
Doug
Schaefer
<DSchaefer@xxxxxxx>
Sent
by: cross-project-issues-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
07/10/2007 03:51 PM
Please
respond to
Cross project issues
<cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
|
|
To
|
Cross project issues
<cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
|
cc
|
|
Subject
|
RE: [cross-project-issues-dev] Re-spin
process / DSDP-TM Re-spin request
|
|
I’m not sure if there is a pattern.
I’ve seen few companies big or small leaping on Europa to release a
product before Sept. But then maybe it’s our past experience with the CDT
driving that:
http://cdtdoug.blogspot.com/2007/06/cdt-4-what-difference-community-makes.html
And maybe there are companies that are more willing to take
the risk or are taking safer plug-ins.
But I hope we can agree that integration testing is an area
that we are sorely missing and that a Beta program would help focus the community
on that activity.
Doug Schaefer, QNX Software Systems
Eclipse CDT Project Lead, http://cdtdoug.blogspot.com
From:
cross-project-issues-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:cross-project-issues-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Scott Lewis
Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2007 3:38 PM
To: Cross project issues
Subject: Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Re-spin process / DSDP-TM
Re-spin request
While I don't disagree with Doug's little secret, I would say it is predicated
on large company/enterprise adoption patterns...and not as obviously true for
small company and/or ISV patterns of adoption.
Scott
Doug Schaefer wrote:
The
thing is, if you go for more than three, how do you get agreement on how
many
and how often. The soonest we can get a new CDT back up to product
quality
with all the fixes going in at the moment is September. If you
decide
to go August and November, you'll miss me (of course assuming you
want
me...)
Now
for those new to Eclipse project management, I'll let you in on a
secret,
and keep it close to your vest, but then you may have heard it
already
;). Very few products take up the end-of-June release because of the
concerns
over the lack of integration/system testing. Most have their eyes
on
the Fall maintenance release since it is by then that the bits get enough
eyes
on them and the major bugs get worked out.
If
we aren't going to get enough test pressure from the community before the
end
of June, we need to set our expectations accordingly. And in some ways,
I'd
wouldn't mind seeing this more formalized, like calling the June release
Europa
Beta and the Fall release Europa. Hmm, the more I think about it, the
more
I like the idea of having a real Beta program. It would be a great way
to
focus the community on doing the necessary testing while giving them
early
access with the appropriate expectations...
Doug Schaefer,
QNX Software Systems
Eclipse
CDT Project Lead, http://cdtdoug.blogspot.com
-----Original
Message-----
From:
cross-project-issues-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:cross-project-
issues-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Markus Knauer
Sent:
Tuesday, July 10, 2007 2:13 PM
To:
Cross project issues
Subject:
Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Re-spin process / DSDP-TM Re-spin
request
Hi
*,
first
of all: I am a bit astonished and anxious about the direction of
this
discussion.
All that leaves behind the impression that many projects were
not
yet
ready for a release and that there is a lack of integration/system
testing
at Eclipse???
As
far as EPP is concerned, I think John's recommendations are the best
and
I
would
go for that. I don't want to touch the June 29th release, but I
support
the
idea of starting soon with new package builds for the 'Europa Fall
Update'.
Hopefully this leads to more and better package testing and
should
improve
the overall quality of the packages.
Maybe
we should discuss to have more than the planned 3 EPP updates every
year
(Europa,
Europa Fall, Europa Spring); as you can see on the EPP webpages
there
is currently no plan for 'past-Europa' - I intended to start now
with
the
planning based on our experience from the Europa Release. But in any
case
'more than 3 EPP releases every year' doesn't mean weekly or even
daily
EPP
builds for end users.
[
EPP and the current re-spin requests: DSDP is not yet included in the
packages,
Datatools might be an issue in the JEE package. ]
Markus
On
Monday 09 July 2007 17:12, John Arthorne wrote:
Why
are those criteria not met by releasing your fixes into a "Europa
Fall
Update"
update site/stream? There would still be a place for the
community
and
products to obtain the latest and greatest from each of the Europa
projects,
without touching the official June 29th release. I really
think
these
Europa respins directly contradict the claim that we are reliable
and
that we ship on time.
I
understand the pain of discovering major bugs after a release date -
we
all
care deeply about releasing quality code. Sadly there is *always*
one
more
bug that we want to fix, and without fixing a release date there
would
be no end to the release cycle. There have already been about 30
bug
fixes
in the Eclipse top level project 3.3.1 stream, including one
critical
and three major bugs. Does this mean we should also release
these
into
the respin? No, because just as there is always one more bug to
fix,
there
is also always the next release. As long as there is some way to
make
the fixes available to those who absolutely need it, there is no
need
to
slip the entire release.
I
think this debate about respins is only happening because we don't yet
have
the Europa fall update site set up yet. In the absence of this,
Europa
respins are the only way to get our critical fixes out there. I
suggest
we create a Europa fall update site as soon as possible so we
can
put
the Europa June 29th release behind us.
John
"Oberhuber,
Martin" <Martin.Oberhuber@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent
by: cross-project-issues-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
07/09/2007
09:42 AM
Please
respond to
Cross project issues
<cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To
"eclipse.org-planning-council"
<eclipse.org-planning-
council@xxxxxxxxxxx>,
"Cross project issues" <cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
cc
Subject
[cross-project-issues-dev]
Re-spin process / DSDP-TM Re-spin request
Hi
all,
Regarding
the re-spin process, I think we should recall what's the
objective
and value proposition of Europa. I found the best definition
in
the recent Planning Council Meeting Notes [1] (applied to Ganymede in
that
context):
"A reliable release stream for commercial product
planning."
Europa
is about showing that commercial products can rely on Eclipse,
that
we ship quality and we ship it in time, and that the various
projects
can be used together because they are released simultaneously.
In
addition to that prime objective, I think there is a second value
proposition:
"Make it simple to get an initial install of (n) dependent
projects."
This
second value is more for the Open Source user community than the
commercial
one, and it's partly addressed by the EPP packages but not
all
projects are in EPP so some of them need the Europa update site.
Keeping
these two goals in mind, I agree that the main Europa Stream
should
be "closed" because otherwise it would not be reliable. However,
we
know that in every released product there can be emergencies, patches
etc.
-- but typically these are kept to the absolute minimum, they are
reproducable
and versioned.
I
consider the discussion about Europa re-spins like an extension of the
written
Ramp Down Policies that were a requirement for all projects.
Extending
what most projects wrote down, I think a re-spin of Europa
would
require "Change Review by more than one PMC for appropriateness
and
risk" before a patch can be released.
Based
on these thoughts, I think the requirements for an Europa re-spin
should
be
1. Reproducable: Europa on Day X must also be creatable by getting
Europa Jun.29 plus some documented project patches via the
project
update sites or download sites.
2. Documented: Europa on Day X must exactly document each and every
change compared to Europa Jun.29 -- by listing Bugzilla's fixed
and listing project patches integrated (on the download page).
3. Quality: Europa on Day X must not introduce any new bugs compared
to Europa Jun.29 -- every patch applied must be reviewed and
tested
for appropriateness and risk (by more than one PMC, I'd think,
extending the current written Ramp-down policies).
All
that being said, I have a concrete request for a re-spin: DSDP-TM
discovered
two critical bugs (192741 and 194204), which could lead to
loss
of data, just a little too late in the testing. These bugs were
immediately
announced in the release notes, but it took until after 2.0
before
a fix was available. We considered it our responsibility to
provide
a patch release (TM 2.0.0.1), which was delivered on our project
update
site as well as our download site this Friday [2]. The patch
release
was thoroughly tested; the fixes are documented on bugzilla,
release
notes, our Wiki as well as the patch build notes.
Referring
to what Dave said, I tested and verified that "Check For
Updates"
does work properly although only the Qualifier was changed in
the
updated features and plugins (TM 2.0.0.1 is patch-only branch and
different
than TM 2.0.1 which we'll be working on for the Fall
Maintenance
Release).
Why
do I think this patch release should go into an Europa re-spin? -
Because
every day, people are getting fresh bits from Europa and perhaps
not
all of them "Check for Updates" after downloading. I'd like to keep
them
from losing data and thus push the patch into Europa, just like I
changed
all the download links on our home page [3]. At any rate,
features-dsdp-tm.xml
has been updated so the next Europa re-spin should
pick
up the changes.
[1]
http://www.eclipse.org/org/councils/20070620PCMinutes.php
[2]
http://tmober.blogspot.com/2007/07/dsdp-tm-rse-2001-critical-patch-relea
se.html
[3]
http://www.eclipse.org/dsdp/tm/
Thanks,
--
Martin
Oberhuber
Wind
River Systems, Inc.
Target
Management Project Lead, DSDP PMC Member
http://www.eclipse.org/dsdp/tm
_______________________________________________
cross-project-issues-dev
mailing list
cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev
_______________________________________________
cross-project-issues-dev
mailing list
cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev
_______________________________________________
cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev