Jump to: navigation, search

Planning Council/March 20 2011

Introduction and Introductions

This is our annual, traditional EclipseCon Face-Face Meetings, Sunday, March 20, At Hyatt, Napa Room.

3-4 (Pacific Time) PC face-to-face meeting, followed by
4-5 (Pacific Time) Joint Councils Meeting (See Donald's note to list).

Logistics

Meeting Title: Planning Council EclipseCon face-to-face meeting
Date & Time: Wednesday, March 20, 2011, at 3:00 PMC Pacific time. Napa Room
Dial-in: No dial in. For the call-in numbers, see the "Project Review" number on Foundation Portal page.

Members and Attendees

PMC (and Strategic) Reps
Chris Aniszczyk Technology (PMC)  ?
John Arthorne Eclipse (PMC)  ?
Oliver Cole Tptp (PMC) X
Mik Kersten Mylyn (ALM) PMC  ?
Brian Payton Datatools (PMC)  ?
Anthony Hunter Tools (PMC) R
Adrian Mos SOA (PMC)  ?
Ed Merks Modeling (PMC)  ?
Thomas Watson Rt (PMC)  ?
David Williams WTP (PMC) (appointed Chair) Y
Gary Xue Birt (PMC) Y
Strategic Reps
Cedric Brun OBEO (Strategic Developer)  ?
Stefan Daume Cloudsmith Inc.(Strategic Developer)  ?
Neil Hauge Oracle (Strategic Developer)  ?
Kaloyan Raev SAP AG (Strategic Developer)  ?
Pascal Rapicault Sonatype (Strategic Developer)  ?
Markus Knauer Innoopract (Strategic Developer)  ?
Christian Kurzke Motorola (Strategic Developer)  ?
Achim Loerke BREDEX (Strategic Developer)  ?
Appointed
Wayne Beaton Eclipse Foundation (appointed)  ?
Inactive
[no name] Nokia (Strategic Developer) X
[no name] CA Inc. (Strategic Consumer) X
[no name] brox IT-Solutions GmbH (Strategic Developer) X

Note: "Inactive" refers to Strategic Members we have not heard from in a year or so, and have been unable to convince to participate. Those members can become active again at any time. Contact David Williams if questions.

Note: feel free to correct any errors/omissions in above attendance record.
Y = Yes, attended
N = No, did not
R = regrets sent ahead of time
X = not expected

Announcements

  •  ?

Indigo Status

  • M6a repo and packages?

Name Indigo +1

We'll examine process, votes, be sure there is a clear winner, and that the winner is not objectionable in some way we didn't think of before. Remember, once we decide the name, it will still have to be "vetted" by Ian/Mike/Janet to make sure there would be no trademark infringement, etc. Is is very unlikely ("no chance") this vetting will be done before/during EclipseCon ... so we can "announce" our choice, but with the caveat "pending final EMO reviews".

(Greatest thanks, Pascal!)

CVS and GIT

  • Status, plans, and urgency of moving from CVS to GIT. Why it is required, again? (Denis, Wayne?)

Misc. References

  • Any discussion of these documents ...
  • V6 of the Eclipse Road Map ... mostly here for reference. Any feedback should have already been given ... board review is next day.

Eclipse 4.2 vs. 3.8

Next year, what's primary, what's secondary? Do we buy-in to the Eclipse Project's (implied) proposal?

How important is it to your project or to your strategic member company, that you represent, to use Eclipse 3.8 or Eclipse 4.2 as primary? Think of it on a 10 point scale (for discussion): 1 is very important to stay on 3.8 as primary, 5 is don't care, happy to go along with what others want/need, and 10 is very important to use 4.2 as the primary?

Long Term Planning discussion

EclipseCon face-to-face is good time to discuss high level or long term issues. The following items are potential items to discuss ... please add any of your own. They can range from a thought or question, to a specific proposal. The purpose of this part of the meeting is not necessarily to decide or resolve any specific issues (there likely would not be time) but to make sure we are all, as a council, in agreement on our general course, what are most important issues to address, etc.

  • Review our Mission and recent retrospectives. In addition to the formal, documented mission, several other motivations tend to influence our efforts:
  • improve quality and consistency of Eclipse as a whole,
  • make things as easy as possible for committers (while meeting other goals),
  • improve "value" of Eclipse, by improving what adopters can adopt and providing what strategic members need.
  • Others ...?
  • How are we doing? Beside 'being on time' are we achieving the right quality? By helping projects focus on "minimum set" of items that are important for Eclipse as a whole?
  • Should we have "must do" items at all? Or, are they just recommendations?
  • Are the requirements about right? Too many? Too few?
  • Should we have requirement related to bug fix rate? Backlog reduction? unit test coverage?
  • Is the release tracking checklist on Portal worthwhile? Should we do away with it? Should we make it better? (Such as, there could be more "auto fill-in" ... such as from other portal data, more "testing" results would provide the main data for forms while projects would provide the documentation for deviations or exceptions).
  • Who is the audience(s)? (Projects, PMCs, Planning Council, Adopters).
  • Is yearly release (with two service releases) the right interval? Should maintenance be quarterly? Should releases be every other year? Or, perhaps, every other year be a LTS releases with "off" year having less maintenance emphasis?
  • Is there too much "pressure" or emphasis that everyone should be part of Simultaneous Release? Or, should it be one of our goals, that every project should be part of the Simultaneous Release? How would we describe or define who should, or who shouldn't?
  • Terminology improvements:
  • "Tracker" --> "Checklist"?
  • "Exceptions" --> "Deviations"?

Next Meeting

  • April 6, 2011 (our regular "first Wednesday" meeting, at Noon Eastern).

Reference

Indigo Requirements
Indigo Wiki page
Planning Council/Helios retrospective
Indigo Simultaneous Release
Planning Council Members
Simultaneous Release Roles and Simultaneous Release Roles/EMO