Skip to main content

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.

Jump to: navigation, search

Difference between revisions of "Eclipse/Mars Retrospective"

m
Line 1: Line 1:
 
This page captures notes for the Mars retrospective to be discussion at one of our Eclipse project weekly architecture call.
 
This page captures notes for the Mars retrospective to be discussion at one of our Eclipse project weekly architecture call.
  
'''Suggested improvements for Neon'''
+
== Suggested improvements for Neon ==
 
*Ensure all tests are executed by the Gerrit build trigger (Lars)
 
*Ensure all tests are executed by the Gerrit build trigger (Lars)
 
*Review days for projects in which the focus is on reviewing community patches (Lars)
 
*Review days for projects in which the focus is on reviewing community patches (Lars)
Line 8: Line 8:
 
*Have a dedicated team member (on rotation) look at test failures and make sure they get fixed for the next I-build at the latest (Dani)
 
*Have a dedicated team member (on rotation) look at test failures and make sure they get fixed for the next I-build at the latest (Dani)
 
*Have a dedicated team member (on rotation) look at the inbox (Dani)
 
*Have a dedicated team member (on rotation) look at the inbox (Dani)
*Component leads update the status wiki page in the interest of saving time for others during the Architecture call.
+
*Component leads update the status wiki page in the interest of saving time for others during the Architecture call (Dani)
* Some components like resources or text have very little activity, maybe combine them with other projects to reduce the overheard? (Lars)
+
*Some components like resources or text have very little activity, maybe combine them with other projects to reduce the overheard? (Lars)
  
 +
 +
== Retrospective ==
  
 
'''Platform UI / Lars'''
 
'''Platform UI / Lars'''
Line 39: Line 41:
 
*What didn't:
 
*What didn't:
 
**Last minute checkin does create confusion like Nashorm Debugging bug
 
**Last minute checkin does create confusion like Nashorm Debugging bug
 +
  
 
'''JDT Core'''
 
'''JDT Core'''
Line 57: Line 60:
 
*What didn't:
 
*What didn't:
 
**High DPI work didn't start soon enough, didn't have time to address all the issues. Should address the remaining concerns earlier in this release.
 
**High DPI work didn't start soon enough, didn't have time to address all the issues. Should address the remaining concerns earlier in this release.
 +
  
 
'''PDE'''
 
'''PDE'''
Line 66: Line 70:
 
**Lot of things got moved out of plan. Needed to have planned moving out of release rather than moving iteration
 
**Lot of things got moved out of plan. Needed to have planned moving out of release rather than moving iteration
 
**Less expertise in PDE build causing issues in junit failures.
 
**Less expertise in PDE build causing issues in junit failures.
 +
  
 
'''SWT'''
 
'''SWT'''
Line 71: Line 76:
  
 
*What didn't:
 
*What didn't:
 +
  
 
'''Dani'''
 
'''Dani'''

Revision as of 05:09, 4 August 2015

This page captures notes for the Mars retrospective to be discussion at one of our Eclipse project weekly architecture call.

Suggested improvements for Neon

  • Ensure all tests are executed by the Gerrit build trigger (Lars)
  • Review days for projects in which the focus is on reviewing community patches (Lars)
  • Use test day only for testing - no last minute commits (Dani)
  • Analysis/investigation, design decision etc. should always be part of bug reports, so that others can follow (Dani)
  • Have a dedicated team member (on rotation) look at test failures and make sure they get fixed for the next I-build at the latest (Dani)
  • Have a dedicated team member (on rotation) look at the inbox (Dani)
  • Component leads update the status wiki page in the interest of saving time for others during the Architecture call (Dani)
  • Some components like resources or text have very little activity, maybe combine them with other projects to reduce the overheard? (Lars)


Retrospective

Platform UI / Lars

  • What went well:
    • Lot of onboarding of new committers.
    • Code cleanup and updates of plug-ins to Java 7.
    • Gerrit build trigger includes more tests.
    • Critical functionality like customize perspective dialog were fixed.
    • E4 tooling were migrated to platform.
  • What didn't:
    • Error reports from Marcel were not really used.
    • Platform tests not working well with GTK3 SWT made it harder to run them locally on Ubuntu 14.04.
    • Gerrit patch for JDT UI to show annotations in Outline view was not reviewed.


Releng

  • What went well:
  • What didn't:


Debug/ Ant

  • What went well:
    • Inbox tracked, items delivered as per the plan
    • Build and Test results tracked and attended
  • What didn't:
    • Last minute checkin does create confusion like Nashorm Debugging bug


JDT Core

  • What went well:
    • New Owner for Formatter and a brand new and much improved formatter
    • Wider adoption of Gerrit among team members
  • What didn't:
    • At times there was not enough communication with respect to review requests, thus resulting in bugs being left out of releases at last minute
    • Several new test failures in areas where no changes were made. Most due to short-comings of test frameworks and took significant amount of time early during the release.


JDT UI

  • What went well:
    • Quality of N&N has improved, less correction to be made (Note: There is still room for improvement in terms of incomplete info, clean up)
    • Build failures, test failures, attended to quickly, didn't have many long standing failures
  • What didn't:
    • High DPI work didn't start soon enough, didn't have time to address all the issues. Should address the remaining concerns earlier in this release.


PDE

  • What went well:
    • Lars coming in with contributions and proactively which is helping PDE's cause.
    • Migration of the E4 project wizard to e4

What didn't:

    • Lot of things got moved out of plan. Needed to have planned moving out of release rather than moving iteration
    • Less expertise in PDE build causing issues in junit failures.


SWT

  • What went well:
  • What didn't:


Dani

  • What went well:
    • Delivered all milestones and RCs on time.
    • Builds went well and we had continuous and fast response to build issues.
    • Lots of achievements/deliverables despite a smaller team.
    • Team and cross-component interaction went well.
    • Architecture call was reasonable short and only used for mostly good discussions.
  • What didn't:
    • Sometimes decisions made in bugs not explained in a way that non-team members can understand it.
    • Bugzilla inbox list is growing in some components, too many open items to be triaged/addressed.
    • Tests for some components sometimes fail for days without interaction.
    • Had an M5a again after a one year pause ==> use test day only for testing - no last minute commits.
    • Component leads should update status wiki page in the interest of saving time for others during the Architecture call.

Back to the top