Notice: this Wiki will be going read only early in 2024 and edits will no longer be possible. Please see: https://gitlab.eclipse.org/eclipsefdn/helpdesk/-/wikis/Wiki-shutdown-plan for the plan.
Difference between revisions of "Architecture Council/Meetings/May 17 2018"
(→Agenda / Notes) |
|||
| Line 26: | Line 26: | ||
International numbers available: https://eclipse.zoom.us/zoomconference?m=zZBWgLOe1JIIW8E3tapxg4jzZNmjTfbO | International numbers available: https://eclipse.zoom.us/zoomconference?m=zZBWgLOe1JIIW8E3tapxg4jzZNmjTfbO | ||
|} | |} | ||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
== Agenda / Notes == | == Agenda / Notes == | ||
| Line 37: | Line 33: | ||
* Introduce new members: Nikhil Nanivadekar, Ivar Grimstad, Jesse McConnell, Jonah Graham, Emily Jiang, Julien Viet, Jeff Johnston, and Dmitry Kornilov | * Introduce new members: Nikhil Nanivadekar, Ivar Grimstad, Jesse McConnell, Jonah Graham, Emily Jiang, Julien Viet, Jeff Johnston, and Dmitry Kornilov | ||
* Review and discuss open [https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/buglist.cgi?bug_status=NEW&classification=Eclipse%20Foundation&component=Architecture%20Council&list_id=17509934&product=Community&query_format=advanced&short_desc=%5BEDP%5D&short_desc_type=allwordssubstr Eclipse Development Process issues]. | * Review and discuss open [https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/buglist.cgi?bug_status=NEW&classification=Eclipse%20Foundation&component=Architecture%20Council&list_id=17509934&product=Community&query_format=advanced&short_desc=%5BEDP%5D&short_desc_type=allwordssubstr Eclipse Development Process issues]. | ||
| − | |||
=== General Notes === | === General Notes === | ||
| + | |||
| + | Gunnar welcomed new members and briefly explained the AC's role and the major goal for this year being revision of EDP. | ||
| + | |||
| + | Each new member introduced her-/himself briefly as well. Wayne also added that each new member represents a different segment of the Eclipse community, greatly increasing the diversity of the council. | ||
| + | |||
| + | Wayne raised a potential issue for the AC calls about staying focused. The AC agreed to keep an eye on it and adjust when it becomes an issue. Gunnar mentioned the idea of focused groups, which could meet separately and discuss specific topics of interest. | ||
| + | |||
| + | The AC then discussed an approach for a rough plan on the upcoming EDP revision. We agreed that collecting requirements would need come first. | ||
| + | |||
| + | We then picked an item from the list in Bugzilla for discussion: release reviews - why do we have them, can we shorten them? | ||
| + | |||
| + | Wayne explained the history of release reviews being connected to the IP policy, which requires regular review of a project's IP conformance. The IP log is reviewed but not part of / attached to a release; nature of IP log not well understood. | ||
| + | |||
| + | The following issues/questions were raised: | ||
| + | * transparency about what is being reviewed | ||
| + | * tying IP log review unnecessarily to releases | ||
| + | * can projects self-certify? | ||
| + | * can we have regular review by IP team (once a year?) | ||
| + | * difference of making binaries available on Maven Central vs. exposing on download.eclipse.org? | ||
| + | |||
| + | The review is mostly performed by Wayne alone. He scans the releases and verifies it with the submitted IP log. The problems uncovered are consistent for type A and B projects. Wayne also mentioned that when problems are found, a period of two weeks is not a lot to mitigate. | ||
| + | |||
| + | Gorkem noted that Type A release shortens the release cycle. | ||
| + | |||
| + | Finished call with Q&A session with Wayne. | ||
== Action Items == | == Action Items == | ||
| − | * | + | *'''Jesse''' to open bug (or GitHub issue) with request "Get clear definition of the definitions we are talking about" |
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
== PMC Rep Attendees == | == PMC Rep Attendees == | ||
| Line 56: | Line 70: | ||
*'''PMC Reps''' please confirm attendance or list your delegate below. Every PMC is required to name a primary and backup delegate, and to ensure that one delegate attends the meeting. | *'''PMC Reps''' please confirm attendance or list your delegate below. Every PMC is required to name a primary and backup delegate, and to ensure that one delegate attends the meeting. | ||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
== Next Meeting == | == Next Meeting == | ||
Latest revision as of 06:14, 22 May 2018
| Meeting Title: | Architecture Council Monthly Meeting |
| Date & Time: | Thursday May 17, 2018 at 1100 Ottawa  HTML |  iCal
|
| Dial in: | Join from PC, Mac, Linux, iOS or Android: https://eclipse.zoom.us/j/438487984
Or iPhone one-tap : US: +16699006833,,438487984# or +14086380968,,438487984# Or Telephone: Dial(for higher quality, dial a number based on your current location)：
US: +1 669 900 6833 or +1 408 638 0968 or +1 646 876 9923
Canada: +1 647 558 0588
France: +33 (0) 1 8288 0188
Germany: +49 (0) 30 3080 6188
United Kingdom: +44 (0) 20 3695 0088
Switzerland: +41 (0) 31 528 0988
Sweden: +46 (0) 8 4468 2488
Denmark: +45 89 88 37 88
Netherlands: +31 (0) 20 241 0288
Meeting ID: 438 487 984
International numbers available: https://eclipse.zoom.us/zoomconference?m=zZBWgLOe1JIIW8E3tapxg4jzZNmjTfbO
|
Agenda / Notes
- Feel free to edit, but not during the call!
- Last meeting: Architecture Council/Meetings/April 12 2018 -- open actions see #Action_Items
- Introduce new members: Nikhil Nanivadekar, Ivar Grimstad, Jesse McConnell, Jonah Graham, Emily Jiang, Julien Viet, Jeff Johnston, and Dmitry Kornilov
- Review and discuss open Eclipse Development Process issues.
General Notes
Gunnar welcomed new members and briefly explained the AC's role and the major goal for this year being revision of EDP.
Each new member introduced her-/himself briefly as well. Wayne also added that each new member represents a different segment of the Eclipse community, greatly increasing the diversity of the council.
Wayne raised a potential issue for the AC calls about staying focused. The AC agreed to keep an eye on it and adjust when it becomes an issue. Gunnar mentioned the idea of focused groups, which could meet separately and discuss specific topics of interest.
The AC then discussed an approach for a rough plan on the upcoming EDP revision. We agreed that collecting requirements would need come first.
We then picked an item from the list in Bugzilla for discussion: release reviews - why do we have them, can we shorten them?
Wayne explained the history of release reviews being connected to the IP policy, which requires regular review of a project's IP conformance. The IP log is reviewed but not part of / attached to a release; nature of IP log not well understood.
The following issues/questions were raised:
- transparency about what is being reviewed
- tying IP log review unnecessarily to releases
- can projects self-certify?
- can we have regular review by IP team (once a year?)
- difference of making binaries available on Maven Central vs. exposing on download.eclipse.org?
The review is mostly performed by Wayne alone. He scans the releases and verifies it with the submitted IP log. The problems uncovered are consistent for type A and B projects. Wayne also mentioned that when problems are found, a period of two weeks is not a lot to mitigate.
Gorkem noted that Type A release shortens the release cycle.
Finished call with Q&A session with Wayne.
Action Items
- Jesse to open bug (or GitHub issue) with request "Get clear definition of the definitions we are talking about"
PMC Rep Attendees
All AC Members are invited.
- PMC Reps please confirm attendance or list your delegate below. Every PMC is required to name a primary and backup delegate, and to ensure that one delegate attends the meeting.