Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Galileo Must Do's: How much Rules? - Resu

[Wayne Beaton <wayne@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

I dropped the ball on this. Chris has picked it up, but is still coming 
up to speed.

Wayne

Richard Gronback wrote:
> Unfortunately, we were missing a voice from Technology on the last call:
> http://wiki.eclipse.org/Planning_Council/Dec_03_2008
>
> Best,
> Rich
>
>
> On 12/4/08 12:04 PM, "Scott Lewis" <slewis@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>   
> > Hi Ed,
> >
> > Just for the record, as a former Technology project lead I approached
> > Rich and the tech PMCs at ESE about the input from technology projects
> > on the Planning Council.  I'm not sure if the Technology PMCs
> > subsequently provided input...but I guess not.
> >
> > And given input from Thomas and others about community needs, I'm still
> > wondering:  why are the number of these must-dos being *increased*?
> >
> > Scott
> >
> >
> > Ed Merks wrote:
> >     
> > > Randy,
> > >
> > > Apparently none of the PMC leads of any of the top-level projects were
> > > approached by any subproject lead with any concerns about the Galileo
> > > must-do's.  As such, the collective silence is interpreted as
> > > pervasive tacit agreement.  At the PC council meeting, we even added
> > > one more must do: change each plugin.properties and feature.properties
> > > to something more descriptive than:
> > >
> > >     providerName=Eclipse.org
> > >
> > > For modeling we're changing it to
> > >
> > >     providerName=Eclipse Modeling Project
> > >
> > > Note that there is a general expectation that PMC leads will
> > > communicate these issues planning with their subproject leads.  If
> > > that isn't happening, i.e., if the above issue is a surprise for you,
> > > then it's time to reestablish your communication channels with your
> > > PMC leads.
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > > Ed
> > >
> > >
> > > Randy Hudson wrote:
> > >       
> > > > Is this another poll?
> > > >
> > > > ;-)
> > > >
> > > > -Randy
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >                
> > > >              Thomas Hallgren
> > > >              <thomas@xxxxxxx>
> > > >              Sent by:                                                   To
> > > >              cross-project-iss         Cross project issues
> > > >              ues-dev-bounces@e         <cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.o
> > > >              clipse.org                rg>
> > > >                                                                         cc
> > > >                
> > > >              11/27/2008 11:11                                      Subject
> > > >              AM                        Re: [cross-project-issues-dev]
> > > >                                        Galileo Must Do's: How much Rules? -
> > > >                                        Results are in
> > > >              Please respond to
> > > >                Cross project
> > > >                   issues
> > > >              <cross-project-is
> > > >              sues-dev@eclipse.
> > > >                    org>
> > > >                
> > > >                
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Oberhuber, Martin wrote:
> > > >
> > > >       35 people participated, the majority voting for "Guidance" through
> > > >       rules and "Ok to have rules since we all gain from the train". Looks
> > > >       like the PC is doing the right thing after all. Thanks, Planning
> > > >       Council!
> > > > Maybe that is jumping to conclusions? Don't forget that there are over 900
> > > > committers that didn't vote at all. What does that mean?
> > > >
> > > > a) They didn't vote because they all agree with PMC's decisions
> > > > b) They didn't vote because they want to spend as little time as possible
> > > > on rules and bureaucracy
> > > >
> > > > My guess would be the latter for the most part and that the 35 that did
> > > > vote have an interest in this that is way above average.
> > > >
> > > > Just my 0.02$
> > > >
> > > > Thomas Hallgren
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > 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
> > >   
> > >       
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
>
>