DTP PMC Meeting, July 29, 2008

From Eclipsepedia

Revision as of 14:59, 29 July 2008 by Brianf.sybase.com (Talk | contribs)

(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search

Back to DTP PMC Meeting Page

Contents

Attendees

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

Regrets

Agenda

  • PMC vote on the following bugs. None affect DTP's basic filtering functionality directly because the multi-predicate features are not currently used in the base DTP plug-ins. I vote +1 on all three to go in for M1 (so did Sheila)
  • Great suggestion from Linda until they name the next major (June 2009) release officially
    • Add the keyword "plan" to any bugzilla entries we want to address in the next major release and set it to "future"
    • This way we can do a search on the "plan" keyword when we're prioritizing bugs/enhancements for the next release
    • And it doesn't slow us down in the meantime
  • Planning for next major release (Galileo/1.7/2.0/June 2009)
  • Open discussion

Themes and Priorities for Next Release

  • Further stabilize the foundation of DTP by resolving as many bugs as possible.
  • If appropriate, promote select DTP 1.6 provisional APIs to platform status.
  • Enhance user tools to make DTP a compelling choice for developing data centric applications in Eclipse by providing additional exemplary tools in a variety of areas, including creation of database objects such as catalogs, schemas, tables, columns, constraints, and so on.
  • Enhance DTP to work better in headless and RCP applications.
  • Accurately prioritize and address bugs, especially those having a severity of major or higher.
  • Grow the DTP community through direct contributions and external projects using DTP components.
  • Make DTP easier to understand and leverage, from both the extender and user perspectives.
  • Meet milestone dates in tight synchronization with Galileo plans.

Minutes

  • Fitz to do - Linda requested that we take a look at SQB bug 220685 to see why it keeps getting reprioritized (was 1.6.1 and is now future)
  • Fitz to do - see about adding a new bugzilla keyword "requested" and ask why we can't just add our own keywords
  • Fitz to do - talk about use of the "plan" and "investigate" or "requested" keywords or voting for bugs at the Team Leads meeting Monday - "plan" means it's being seriously considered, "investigate" means it's being requested
  • Linda, John, Sheila - Asking for specific things that we'd like to see from Red Hat, Actuate, IBM by August 15
  • We will come up with a wish list by August 15, then we will go to the Team Leads to see what their teams are prepared to commit resources to, get community input by September 1 -- then be ready for the XML formatted project plan in late September
  • get requirements from real adopters - and then will we be able to get committer time to actually do the work
  • emphasize that if you can't contribute resources, we're still interested in the requirement, but if we don't have sufficient resources it may fall on the priority list
  • for builds, now we have some M1 bugs in the process and the M1 build isn't daily, just request a build from Xiaoying when appropriate
  • Fitz to do - request build from Xiaoying on her Friday (our Thursday afternoon), also mention to Xiaoying that this build will be an M1 integration build
  • For Brian Payton's bug - process wasn't followed during rampdown - ask him to query the PMC when he gets back from vacation, then we can vote on it
  • remind folks that the approvals can be requested via the PMC fields in bugzilla and that would also work as well as the dtp-pmc mailing list
  • may need to go through and update the field numbers for the release/milestone
  • request a build from Xiaoying for her Friday. put it on dtp-pmc & dtp-dev

Action Items

  • New dependencies need to be approved, especially those across other projects, orbit, 3rd party, or whatever - need to write up as part of the DTP policies and procedures
  • Need to add some policy regarding extension point documentation. Declare that if new extension points are added, they must have documentation by the mid-point milestone.

Tabled for Later Discussion

  • Discuss after Ganymede release
    • Discuss DTP charter change to simplify addition of a committer to two or more subprojects at the same time without going through separate committer elections
    • Perhaps in the future come up with a Component architecture document that shows DTP dependencies to consumers
    • Things to consider for next major release (June 2009) - JDK 1.4 end of life, move to JDK 1.5 in next release? Depends on platform support. Something to discuss going forward