| Meeting Title:
|| Planning Council Conference Call
| Date & Time:
|| Wednesday, June 8, 2016, at 1200 Noon Eastern
| Dial in:
|| (See Asterisk service for complete details on SIP, potential new numbers, phone mute commands, etc.)
Phone Numbers: (Check Asterisk/Numbers for more or current phone numbers.)
- For all phone lines: Participant conference extension: 710 then enter pin 35498
- Ottawa (local call in Ottawa) 1-613-454-1403
- North America (toll free) 1-866-569-4992
- Germany (local call anywhere in Germany) +49-692-2224-6059
- France (local call anywhere in France) +33-17-070-8535
- UK (toll free) 0800-033-7806
- Switzerland (local call anywhere in Switzerland) +41-44-580-2115
- call firstname.lastname@example.org, then enter pin 35498.
Members and Attendees
PMC (and Strategic) Reps
| Martin Lippert
|| Cloud (PMC)
| Chris Aniszczyk
|| Technology (PMC)
| Dani Megert
|| Eclipse (PMC)
| Sam Davis
|| Mylyn (ALM) PMC
|| D (Colin Ritchie)
| Brian Payton
|| Datatools (PMC)
| Doug Schaefer
|| Tools (PMC)
| Ian Bull
|| Rt (PMC)
| Chuck Bridgham
|| WTP (PMC)
| Wayne Beaton
|| Eclipse Foundation (appointed)
| David Williams
|| (appointed Chair)
| Marc Khouzam
| Alexander Nyssen
|| itemis AG (Strategic Developer)
| Nick Boldt
|| Redhat (Strategic Developer)
| Remi Schnekenburger
|| CEA List (Strategic Developer)
| Cedric Brun
|| OBEO (Strategic Developer)
| Neil Hauge
|| Oracle (Strategic Developer)
| Stephan Merker
|| SAP AG (Strategic Developer)
| Markus Knauer
|| EPP (appointed)
| (has PMC rep; Dani Megert)
|| IBM (Strategic Developer)
| [no name]
|| CA Inc. (Strategic Consumer)
| (was Gary Xue)
|| Birt (PMC)
| (has/had PMC rep)
|| Actuate (Strategic Developer)
| (was Rajeev Dayal)
|| Google (Strategic Developer)
| Ed Merks
|| Modeling (PMC)
| Adrian Mos (Marc Dutoo )
|| SOA (PMC)
Note: "Inactive" refers to Strategic Members or PMCs we have not heard from for a while 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
D = delegated
X = not expected
Previous meeting minutes
- Review previous meeting minutes if you'd like. That is, review them before the meeting, but if questions or issues with previous minutes, this would be a good time to bring them up.
- Dates (and RCs) for Neon.1 (etc.) approved via mailing list.
- - Calendar updated through "end of year" (still need to do 2017).
- Date for milestones, RCs and release approved via mailing list.
- - Calendar updated through "end of year" (still need to do 2017).
- ACTION ITEM: from the mailing list: Improve "Plan" wording about "format" and "when it is due".
- - DONE: See Wayne's response
- - Briefly discussed "what plan is expected" and Wayne said "not much" from EDT point of view. No one on council seemed to want more (at this meeting) for Simultaneous Release.
- There has been a lot of discussion about "giving up release name" and using "date" instead. See bug 493490.
- - ACTION ITEM: Wayne to discuss with Ian on how best to get more data from our community of users.
- - DONE (mostly): Wayne said Ian thought we didn't have a specific enough "problem" to ask general users about.
- - Further discussion in the meeting lead to the idea that one thing that is missing is what DO we call the "think" we are releasing. "Eclipse Neon" seems too vague and definitely sounds like a different thing than "Eclipse Mars" (even if you add "release". Some quick suggestions were "Eclipse IDE - Neon Version" or similar (with dates, probably).
- - ACTION ITEM: Doug said he would try to re-ignite the discussion via blog or similar.
- *- Main point is that we owe the community some response on bug 493490 about what our plan will be.
old (ongoing) stuff
- Release Policy vs. Release mechanics. This is being tracked in bug 483322.
- In M6 we changed to have (nearly) all features to be "root features.
- Now what? That is, can we "stop" adding "reference repositories" via feature p2.inf files?
- I have sometimes heard it suggested we allow more of a "continuous release". Is this something we should discuss? Should we have some long term planning for it? Such as, what would it take to accomplish that?
- This could be planned with or without the "beta stream" mechanisms sometimes discussed.
- Did not discuss much during this meeting, other than to note similarity to above issue.
- Should the ability to update from yearly release to yearly release be a 'requirement'?
- Impossible now, for Neon. Right? (for EPP Packages) Do we still need "streamless-URL" now? I am assuming "no".
- ACTION ITEM from 6/8 meeting. Doug volunteered to "take up" this item to better specify "what does it mean" and "what will it take" to update across major releases. [Doug, it is up to you, but I suggest you form a small team of like 3 people, such as Ian and Dani or, others who know some of the technical issues, to help if they are able and willing.] The goal being just a more specific statement of what it means, and what projects have to do differently for Oxygen. That is, we don't need to reach Nirvana in one release cycle.
- What would this take? (Such as features are never "just removed" but are replaced or transitioned?)
- Preferences, views, etc. have to "migrate" (if their ID changes).
- What testing would projects have to do?
- May become "defacto requirement" once bug 483786 is implemented.
- For Neon we will not have a "streamless" URL, since "won't work" for upgrading to Neon for the EPP packages.
- Wayne could not make the meeting, but posted a message to our mailing list about concern over some specific projects -- some of which may have to be "removed" from the train. But, in addition, expressed concern over "the process".
- - I agree and commented on a similar issue on cross-project list about two projects who "declared intent", but thought they could join the build at the last minute.
- - I wondered out loud if it was time for more of a Sim. Release process where projects had to "prove they were ready to be in the Sim. Release" instead of us just saying what they needed to do, and then assume they were doing it. We did not discuss at this meeting, but, for example, I mean like a checklist (web app) that has to be updated every milestone? Just an idea.
- A question was raised if people have to "announce" they will be in "Neon.1" if they were in Neon. The answer was "no". [Did not mention it at meeting, but they should announce if they are NOT going to be in Neon.1.]
- - This led to a brief discussion if projects should "rebuild" if their prereqs change. For example, if a security bug is found in an Orbit bundle. A few thought "yes", but seemed the consensus was "there was no way we could force them to" (i.e. can not leave them out, or else their "previous release" would still be there with the bad bundle) and it was probably a fringe enough case we did not need to have a rule about it.
- A question was raised how we can avoid issues such as with Neon where Window Builder was excluded for Neon. They were ready at the very very last minute but had not done any builds or testing for all of Neon. Somehow, we should "detect" when projects are not active so we can approach them early to find out if the project is viable, if they are testing, etc.
- September 7, 2016 - Regular First Wednesday Meeting
- Draft Eclipse Project Branding Requirements (Wayne)
- Neon Wiki page
- Planning Council Members
- Simultaneous Release Roles and Simultaneous Release Roles/EMO