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.
Planning Council/August 06 2008
| Meeting Title: | Planning Council Conference Call |
| Date & Time: | Thursday August 06, 2008 at 1500 UTC / 0800 SFO / 1100 NYC / 1600 London / 1700 Berlin |
| Dial-in: | For the call-in numbers, please see the Portal page. |
Contents
Attendees
Topics
- Planning Council rotating chair position
- 2009 release train dates
- 2009 release: update site, packages, or both? improve packaging/testing?
- Project Plan (format and delivery)
- Call and meeting schedule (November 2008? December 2008 - plenary session with Board?)
- Board interaction
- Interested in IP process improvement discussion?
Additional Topics, not necessarily in order (before the meeting, the Program Chair can blend with main list and order them depending on overall priorities).
- Do we have an accurate, active Planning Council member list?
- What's the connection between simultaneous release, EPP packages, and Planning Council? That is, what is our (Planning Council) response to bug 238960? Is it "none of our business"? and EPP can do what they want? If we (Planning Council) do play a role, then what is the connection of packages to the yearly simultaneous release? That is, should we "insist" on opportunity per year to create packages? Or, should we have more than one semi-simultaneous release to accommodate "off cycle" projects?
- Let's pick a new name for the 2009 simultaneous release. Just kidding!!! But, we should discuss what the process is. Do we, Planning Council want to decide ourselves (for 2010 release)? It appears "the community" really, really! likes participating. Should we just always have a yearly "contest" like we did the first year?
- Should we have monthly calls scheduled? Or, just "on demand"? [and, if the former, can we discuss/decide time-slot during this meeting?]
- When should we document the "must do" lists for Galileo Release? I'd assume we'd want to raise the bar a bit, so should be done done soon so Projects can plan/decide if they want/be able to participate.