Jump to: navigation, search

Difference between revisions of "WTP 2.0 Ramp down Plan for Europa"

(added dates and policies)
 
m (Exceptions to being Feature Complete in M6)
 
(25 intermediate revisions by 9 users not shown)
Line 2: Line 2:
  
 
For reference, see the [[Europa Simultaneous Release]],
 
For reference, see the [[Europa Simultaneous Release]],
in particular [[Europa_Simultaneous_Release#Milestones_and_Release_Candidates]]
+
in particular the [[Europa_Simultaneous_Release#Milestones_and_Release_Candidates | Milestones and Release Candidates]].
  
From M6 to RC1 on May 18th, we expect each component lead (or delegate) to review and
+
Typically the last week of a Milestone is for testing, and fixing only regressions and P1 or blocking defects.
verify their teams' bugs.
+
For milestones, the component lead (or delegate) is enough to review and approve a bug.  
  
After the first RC is produced, others will be produced, if needed, every week.  
+
For M6, we plan to be functionally and API complete and the remaining Release Candidates are for (only) fixing bugs, or fixing release required items (such as version numbers, licensing, etc.).  An exception to this general rule will exist for 1.0 level projects (JPA and JSF), where minor enhancements and other polish items will be allowed until RC0 (May 18th).
  
* May 18th, RC 1 produced
+
From M6 to RC0 on May 18th, we expect each component lead (or delegate) to review and
 +
verify their teams' bugs.
  
:After the 18th, besides the normal component team review, at least 1 PMC member must also vote +1 after reviewing the bug for appropriateness and risk.
+
After the first RC is produced, other RCs will be produced, if needed, every week.  
  
* May 25
+
After the first RC is produced, the time for general functional improvements is long past. The following describes the types of bugs that would be appropriate:
 +
<ol>
 +
* A regression
 +
* A P1 or P2 bug, one that is blocking or critical, and some cases of major severities.
 +
* Documentation and PII files are exceptions to the normal PMC required review, since there is little chance of that breaking anything, though it is still expected to be complete by M6, and remaining work to be only documentation fixes (that is, no refactoring of plugins, build changes, etc, without PMC review and approval).
 +
* In addition to a bug meeting the above priority/severity conditions, there should be a simple, safe, well understood fix that is well isolated from effecting other components, that doesn't affect API or adopters, that has been well reviewed and well tested.
 +
* As each Release Candidate passes, the criteria for weighing the benefit-to-risk ratio criteria gets higher and higher, and as such requires a larger number of PMC members to review.
 +
<ol>
 +
* May 18th, RC0 produced
  
 +
:After the 18th, besides the normal component team review, at least 1 PMC member must also review and vote +1 after reviewing the bug for appropriateness and risk.
  
* June 1
+
* May 25, RC1 produced
  
:After June 1, besides the normal component team review, at least 2 PMC members must also vote +1 after reviewing the bug for appropriateness and risk.
 
  
* June 8
+
* June 5, RC2 produced
  
 +
:After June 5, besides the normal component team review, at least 2 PMC members must also review and vote +1 after reviewing the bug for appropriateness and risk.
  
* June 15
 
  
:After the 15th, besides the normal component team review, at least 3 PMC member must also vote +1 after reviewing the bug for appropriateness and risk.
+
* June 14, RC3 produced
  
* June 22
+
:After the 14th, besides the normal component team review, at least 3 PMC members must also review and vote +1 after reviewing the bug for appropriateness and risk.
  
:Begin zip, update, site preparations
+
* June 21, RC4 produced
 +
 
 +
:Do zip, update, site preparations
  
 
* June 29
 
* June 29
  
: release
+
:Release
 +
</ol></ol>
 +
 
 +
== Exceptions to being Feature Complete in M6 ==
 +
 
 +
The following features did not make M6, as planned, but it's felt they can be finished up in the first 2-4 weeks of our RC0 cycle and would be worth including in RC0, without introducing instability. In some cases, adopters may need to react, so we'll provide updates via the bugzilla reports and make announcements on wtp-dev mailing list.
 +
 
 +
Items discovered later in RC0 that are features that really are needed in our 2.0 release will be entered in bugzilla, and require PMC review and approval.
 +
 
 +
*JEE:
 +
**Archive (import/export)
 +
**[https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=182975 182975: Extension point for classpath containers that should be ignored by J2EE module dependency logic]
 +
 
 +
*Web Services:
 +
**Six RFEs will integrate extensions to the Web services tools in support of Apache Axis2. Technical work except for bug fixes was completed as of March 14, and will be committed once legal clearance is granted.  The main RFE is [https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=165664 165664 - Integrate Apache Axis2 into WTP].  It includes the following child RFEs:
 +
***[https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=168762 168762: Create Axis2 Web service]
 +
***[https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=172186 172186: Create Axis2 Web service client]
 +
***[https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=168765 168765: User-specified Axis2 runtime location]
 +
***[https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=168766 168766: Adding Axis2 facet]
 +
***[https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=168937 168937: Axis2 preference page]
 +
**RFE [https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=173552 173552] will upgrade Apache Axis 1.3 to Apache Axis 1.4. Technical work is complete, and will be committed once legal clearance is granted.
 +
***RFE [https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=176493 176493] will integrate a new extension point into the Web Services Explorer (WSE) to permit future versions of WTP or adopters of WTP to plug-in a SOAP message engine to support protocols not handled by the WSE's current, simple, limited built-in message engine.
 +
 
 +
*Packaging: Need to use bundles from orbit and sign jars. Plus other feature changes that adopters might have to react to, see [https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=181362 bug 181362], [https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=130165 bug 130165], [https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=176492 bug 176492]
 +
 
 +
*JSP 2.0 (portions of meta[https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=124288 bug])
 +
**[https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=109721 109721]: support for web.xml specified includes
 +
**<s>[https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=104785 104785 ]: support for web.xml specified file encoding</s> (deferred to 3.0)
 +
**[https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=90297 90297]: validation of Java sources in .tag files
 +
**[https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=119942 119942]: debugging of .tag/.tagx files
 +
**[https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=155907 155907]: support for 2.0 .jsp and .tag file-specific actions and directives
 +
 
 +
*Server tools: Preview server not working for J2EE web apps (bug [https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=181081 181081])
 +
 
 +
*Faceted Project Framework
 +
**[UI] selecting a configuration (preset) should not clear default runtime facets (bug [https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=173546 173546])
 +
**Wizard and extension point to allow facet authors to contribute repair actions (bug [https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=163401  163401])
 +
 
 +
*JSF Tools Project
 +
**[API] Need to remove "internal.provisional" from and add "internal" to package names (bug [https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=181822 181822])
 +
*Dali JPA Tools
 +
**[[Dali 1.0M7 Plan]]
 +
 
 +
[[Category:Eclipse Web Tools Platform Project]]

Latest revision as of 09:24, 20 June 2007

Ramp down for Europa

For reference, see the Europa Simultaneous Release, in particular the Milestones and Release Candidates.

Typically the last week of a Milestone is for testing, and fixing only regressions and P1 or blocking defects. For milestones, the component lead (or delegate) is enough to review and approve a bug.

For M6, we plan to be functionally and API complete and the remaining Release Candidates are for (only) fixing bugs, or fixing release required items (such as version numbers, licensing, etc.). An exception to this general rule will exist for 1.0 level projects (JPA and JSF), where minor enhancements and other polish items will be allowed until RC0 (May 18th).

From M6 to RC0 on May 18th, we expect each component lead (or delegate) to review and verify their teams' bugs.

After the first RC is produced, other RCs will be produced, if needed, every week.

After the first RC is produced, the time for general functional improvements is long past. The following describes the types of bugs that would be appropriate:

    • A regression
    • A P1 or P2 bug, one that is blocking or critical, and some cases of major severities.
    • Documentation and PII files are exceptions to the normal PMC required review, since there is little chance of that breaking anything, though it is still expected to be complete by M6, and remaining work to be only documentation fixes (that is, no refactoring of plugins, build changes, etc, without PMC review and approval).
    • In addition to a bug meeting the above priority/severity conditions, there should be a simple, safe, well understood fix that is well isolated from effecting other components, that doesn't affect API or adopters, that has been well reviewed and well tested.
    • As each Release Candidate passes, the criteria for weighing the benefit-to-risk ratio criteria gets higher and higher, and as such requires a larger number of PMC members to review.
      • May 18th, RC0 produced
      After the 18th, besides the normal component team review, at least 1 PMC member must also review and vote +1 after reviewing the bug for appropriateness and risk.
      • May 25, RC1 produced
      • June 5, RC2 produced
      After June 5, besides the normal component team review, at least 2 PMC members must also review and vote +1 after reviewing the bug for appropriateness and risk.
      • June 14, RC3 produced
      After the 14th, besides the normal component team review, at least 3 PMC members must also review and vote +1 after reviewing the bug for appropriateness and risk.
      • June 21, RC4 produced
      Do zip, update, site preparations
      • June 29
      Release

Exceptions to being Feature Complete in M6

The following features did not make M6, as planned, but it's felt they can be finished up in the first 2-4 weeks of our RC0 cycle and would be worth including in RC0, without introducing instability. In some cases, adopters may need to react, so we'll provide updates via the bugzilla reports and make announcements on wtp-dev mailing list.

Items discovered later in RC0 that are features that really are needed in our 2.0 release will be entered in bugzilla, and require PMC review and approval.

  • Packaging: Need to use bundles from orbit and sign jars. Plus other feature changes that adopters might have to react to, see bug 181362, bug 130165, bug 176492
  • JSP 2.0 (portions of metabug)
    • 109721: support for web.xml specified includes
    • 104785 : support for web.xml specified file encoding (deferred to 3.0)
    • 90297: validation of Java sources in .tag files
    • 119942: debugging of .tag/.tagx files
    • 155907: support for 2.0 .jsp and .tag file-specific actions and directives
  • Server tools: Preview server not working for J2EE web apps (bug 181081)
  • Faceted Project Framework
    • [UI] selecting a configuration (preset) should not clear default runtime facets (bug 173546)
    • Wizard and extension point to allow facet authors to contribute repair actions (bug 163401)
  • JSF Tools Project
    • [API] Need to remove "internal.provisional" from and add "internal" to package names (bug 181822)
  • Dali JPA Tools