Jump to: navigation, search

Difference between revisions of "DTP PMC Meeting, October 14, 2008"

(Minutes)
 
(2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 24: Line 24:
 
*Discussion of the Adapter/Enablement distribution method from WTP. Are companies that don't contribute their projects back to Enablement considered 2nd class citizens? Must be some kind of regulation for quality reasons. Need to make sure we're not enabling them to contribute something not minimally validated.
 
*Discussion of the Adapter/Enablement distribution method from WTP. Are companies that don't contribute their projects back to Enablement considered 2nd class citizens? Must be some kind of regulation for quality reasons. Need to make sure we're not enabling them to contribute something not minimally validated.
 
*Make it clear to user category that this is a separate category of components. Once you enable these extensions, users need to be made aware of any stricter requirements
 
*Make it clear to user category that this is a separate category of components. Once you enable these extensions, users need to be made aware of any stricter requirements
 +
*New and Noteworthy - more of highlights of the changes. Create a New & Noteworthy wiki page and tell the committers that when you do something you want noted, you go to the wiki page and make an entry - update it each week from the query - use noteworthy keyword
 +
*Ecore ODA project - Linda asked if they were ready to promote their component into Enablement. They said yes. They'll have some cleanup to do, but seemed happy to do that. So what's the promotion process?
 +
**Technical eclipse process part - in project plan, add that this component may graduate
 +
**During release review - highlight that this component is graduating
 +
**Check to see if we need a separate graduation review
 +
**IP review - parallel IP - do initial review and maybe another level of review - check on this
 +
**Process - DTP PMC has to decide what we expect and validate accordingly - document activity from user community (newsgroups, etc.)
 +
*Linda asked about ASIQ - will it be contributed any time soon to DTP? - they've been BIRT certified, but would also like to be able to use the SQB
  
 
==Action Items==
 
==Action Items==
 
*Brian- go back to WTP (David Williams) to see if they have some sort of validation process during next week's meeting - process question - how do we structure the process so we don't get caught
 
*Brian- go back to WTP (David Williams) to see if they have some sort of validation process during next week's meeting - process question - how do we structure the process so we don't get caught
 +
*PMC-to-do - Take a look at the committer how to and get back with suggestions on what should go into our own version of this document
  
 
==Tabled for Later Discussion==
 
==Tabled for Later Discussion==
  
 
[[Category:Data Tools Platform]]
 
[[Category:Data Tools Platform]]

Latest revision as of 13:52, 14 October 2008

Back to DTP PMC Meeting Page

Attendees

  • Brian Fitzpatrick
  • Linda Chan
  • John Graham
  • Sheila Sholars

Regrets

Agenda

  • Architecture Council now wants an AC member to be a mentor to the Incubator projects. Though Linda has been helping out a ton with the ODA-Ecore provider, John and I were chatting and think that I should just be the mentor "in name" to meet this AC requirement and Linda would be the mentor by proxy.
  • Enablement - Oracle has proposed (as I did earlier in the year) that we attempt to use a method similar to WTP's method of pulling in distributed plug-ins to help our users and developers pull in enablement plug-ins for different databases and other sources (such as Oracle & JBoss) or where we can simplify grabbing wrapped JDBC drivers (like SQLite, Sybase, etc.) from within Eclipse instead of going out, downloading them, and dropping them in the installation
  • For our committers, I think we should do something similar to what RSE has done (http://www.eclipse.org/dsdp/tm/development/committer_howto.php) to provide some details on how our processes work
  • Open discussion
  • For New and Noteworthy as we go through Galileo, I'm thinking we use a simple process for developers.
    • For any bug/enhancement they deliver a fix for, they'll need to update Bugzilla anyway.
    • Have them add [NN] to the title of the BZ entry and put a comment in the bug summarizing what's changed.
    • We can then just go through and do a query for a given milestone, pull together (and edit) the comments, and publish a PHP/HTML file with the relevant changes.
    • Alternative: Have them add [NN] to the comment where they summarize what's changed. We should be able to query on that as well.

Minutes

  • Put Brian's name down as the AC member mentor for now
  • Nominate Linda as an Architecture Council member
  • Discussion of the Adapter/Enablement distribution method from WTP. Are companies that don't contribute their projects back to Enablement considered 2nd class citizens? Must be some kind of regulation for quality reasons. Need to make sure we're not enabling them to contribute something not minimally validated.
  • Make it clear to user category that this is a separate category of components. Once you enable these extensions, users need to be made aware of any stricter requirements
  • New and Noteworthy - more of highlights of the changes. Create a New & Noteworthy wiki page and tell the committers that when you do something you want noted, you go to the wiki page and make an entry - update it each week from the query - use noteworthy keyword
  • Ecore ODA project - Linda asked if they were ready to promote their component into Enablement. They said yes. They'll have some cleanup to do, but seemed happy to do that. So what's the promotion process?
    • Technical eclipse process part - in project plan, add that this component may graduate
    • During release review - highlight that this component is graduating
    • Check to see if we need a separate graduation review
    • IP review - parallel IP - do initial review and maybe another level of review - check on this
    • Process - DTP PMC has to decide what we expect and validate accordingly - document activity from user community (newsgroups, etc.)
  • Linda asked about ASIQ - will it be contributed any time soon to DTP? - they've been BIRT certified, but would also like to be able to use the SQB

Action Items

  • Brian- go back to WTP (David Williams) to see if they have some sort of validation process during next week's meeting - process question - how do we structure the process so we don't get caught
  • PMC-to-do - Take a look at the committer how to and get back with suggestions on what should go into our own version of this document

Tabled for Later Discussion