Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [incubation] Interim Release with Open CQs

Wayne,

This is a good link, but it directly brings up the question on how this list is sorted/processed (no, I do not expect any real answer here).

E.g. looking at the first from the top with OS=new, I find https://dev.eclipse.org/ipzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9015, which is idle since 9 months.
On the P3, one of the top most is https://dev.eclipse.org/ipzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=8443 from July 2014…

This seems to suggest that the sorting does not have any meaning, because obviously many other CQs from lower on the list have been processed.
So I do not see how this link answers Werner’s question (and I am personally interested because it was me who created the CQ).

But back to the original topic, Christopher’s question points at a real problem that projects with many external dependencies clearly suffer - I haven’t done any release for 1.5 years now, since there are long running CQs without an indication by when they might become approved.

Regards,
Kai

On 22 Mar 2016, at 19:35, Wayne Beaton <wayne@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

The IP Team's work queue is accessible by clicking "IP Team Work Queue" at the bottom of any IPZilla page.

https://dev.eclipse.org/ipzilla/

Note to lurkers: IPZilla is only accessible by committers.



On 22/03/16 09:34 AM, Werner Keil wrote:
Hi Ben,
 
Thanks for the input. Any idea, when the IP team might get to those CQs. We were at the forefront of JSRs (see https://github.com/jsr107/jsr107spec/issues/333 where JSR 107 discusses a possible change of the same Spec License in its public API already being Final there;-) but addressed all concerns by Eclipse, Apache or similar Open Source ecosystems where either JSR 363 or implementations (GeoAPI) are used or will be in the near future.
 
Although a Java SE implementation of JSR 363 exists https://github.com/unitsofmeasurement/uom-se Eclipse not only the Science projects would benefit from using it, too, either directly or via implementations by UOMo.
 
Thanks,
Werner
 
Gesendet: Dienstag, 22. März 2016 um 14:09 Uhr
Von: "Benjamin Cabé" <benjamin@xxxxxxxxxxx>
An: "Discussions for new Eclipse projects" <incubation@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Betreff: Re: [incubation] Interim Release with Open CQs
Hi Werner,
 
Like Wayne said, before producing a milestone release, or even checking in the code, the IP team need to grant checkin approval. It does not seem to be the case yet for the CQs you are referring to.
 
Benjamin –
 
 
De : <incubation-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx> on behalf of Werner Keil <werner.keil@xxxxxxx>
Répondre à : Discussions for new Eclipse projects <incubation@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date : mardi 22 mars 2016 12:28
À : <wayne@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc : <incubation@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Objet : Re: [incubation] Interim Release with Open CQs
 
Hi Wayne,
 
Thanks for sharing. Guess it also means, incubating UoMo can do a branch or even Milestone release using JSR 363 till the 2 new CQs by SmartHome
 
Gesendet: Dienstag, 22. März 2016 um 04:05 Uhr
Von: "Wayne Beaton" <wayne@xxxxxxxxxxx>
An: incubation@xxxxxxxxxxx
Betreff: Re: [incubation] Interim Release with Open CQs
Hi Christopher.

Projects can do releases while in incubation.

All CQs for code/libraries that are included in the release bits must be closed/approved by the IP Team prior to the release.

In the time leading up to the release, you can and should distribute milestone builds that includes code/libraries that the IP team has granted checkin approval for. These are not official releases, and should be annotated as such (e.g. 0.7M2).

I recommend that the Science Working Group make a master list of all the open CQs that are required for the coordinated autumn release that we can present to the IP Team along with your last question. This should be a relatively easy query if we have a list of participating projects. Giving the IP Team a clear picture of what needs to be accomplished is the best way of getting that question answered.

By way of background for those readers who are not involved in the Science Working Group's communications: several of the Science projects have decided to do a coordinated release in the fall (along the lines of what the Planning Council does with the Simultaneous Release)

HTH,

Wayne
 
On 21/03/16 07:04 PM, Christopher Brooks wrote:
Triquetrum is using the Parallel IP Process. 

We have open CQs for third party material:
 
https://dev.eclipse.org/ipzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10439 - diva
https://dev.eclipse.org/ipzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10440 - ptolemy.actor.gui
https://dev.eclipse.org/ipzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10441 - ptolemy.actor.lib
https://dev.eclipse.org/ipzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10442 - ptolemy.core
https://dev.eclipse.org/ipzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10443 - ptolemy.sdf
https://dev.eclipse.org/ipzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10444 - ptolemy.gui
https://dev.eclipse.org/ipzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10445 - ptolemy.moml
https://dev.eclipse.org/ipzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10446 - org.ptolemy.commons
https://dev.eclipse.org/ipzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10856 - ptolemy.domains.process

We would like to participate in the Science/Industry Working Group Autumn 2016 release, which is scheduled for October 21, 2016.

Can do an interim release with open CQs while remaining in incubation?

https://wiki.eclipse.org/Development_Resources/HOWTO/Incubation_Phase says:
 
  • Interim Releases. Incubation Phase projects may make releases. All major and minor releases must go through a Release Review.
https://wiki.eclipse.org/Development_Resources/HOWTO/Release_Reviews says:
 

Intellectual Property

Before you can consider a Release Review, all of the relevant CQs must be approved by the Eclipse Legal team. We cannot schedule a Review before the Legal team has completed their work. If you are waiting for CQs, please review where your CQs are, and when they are scheduled to be reviewed, in the IP team work queue.


The above indicates to me that we need to have the CQs approved before release review.  Does approved mean closed?

If we need to have these CQs closed, is it feasible to have them closed by the end of September so that we can schedule a release review? 

Thanks,

_Christopher
 
--
Christopher Brooks, PMP                       University of California
Academic Program Manager & Software Engineer  US Mail: 337 Cory Hall
CHESS/iCyPhy/Ptolemy/TerraSwarm               Berkeley, CA 94720-1774
cxh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, 707.332.0670           (Office: 545Q Cory)
 
 
 
_______________________________________________
incubation mailing list
incubation@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/incubation
 
--
Wayne Beaton
@waynebeaton
The Eclipse Foundation
<Mail Attachment.jpeg>
_______________________________________________ incubation mailing list incubation@xxxxxxxxxxx To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/incubation
_______________________________________________ incubation mailing list incubation@xxxxxxxxxxx To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/incubation
_______________________________________________ incubation mailing list incubation@xxxxxxxxxxx To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/incubation


_______________________________________________
incubation mailing list
incubation@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/incubation

--
Wayne Beaton
@waynebeaton
The Eclipse Foundation
<eclipsecon-130x100.jpg>
_______________________________________________
incubation mailing list
incubation@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/incubation


Back to the top