Notice: This Wiki is now read only and edits are no longer possible. Please see: https://gitlab.eclipse.org/eclipsefdn/helpdesk/-/wikis/Wiki-shutdown-plan for the plan.
Difference between revisions of "Planning Council/April 06 2016"
m (→new business: typo) |
m (/* Members and Attendees) |
||
Line 36: | Line 36: | ||
| Martin Lippert | | Martin Lippert | ||
| Cloud (PMC) | | Cloud (PMC) | ||
− | | | + | | Y |
|- | |- | ||
| Chris Aniszczyk | | Chris Aniszczyk | ||
Line 44: | Line 44: | ||
| Dani Megert | | Dani Megert | ||
| Eclipse (PMC) | | Eclipse (PMC) | ||
− | | | + | | Y |
|- | |- | ||
| Sam Davis | | Sam Davis | ||
| Mylyn (ALM) PMC | | Mylyn (ALM) PMC | ||
− | | | + | | Y |
|- | |- | ||
| Brian Payton | | Brian Payton | ||
Line 56: | Line 56: | ||
| Doug Schaefer | | Doug Schaefer | ||
| Tools (PMC) | | Tools (PMC) | ||
− | | | + | | Y |
|- | |- | ||
| Ian Bull | | Ian Bull | ||
Line 68: | Line 68: | ||
| Wayne Beaton | | Wayne Beaton | ||
| Eclipse Foundation (appointed) | | Eclipse Foundation (appointed) | ||
− | | | + | | Y |
|- | |- | ||
| David Williams | | David Williams | ||
Line 80: | Line 80: | ||
| Alexander Nyssen | | Alexander Nyssen | ||
| Itemis | | Itemis | ||
− | | | + | | Y |
|- | |- | ||
− | | Nick Boldt | + | | Nick Boldt (and Max) |
| Redhat (Strategic Developer) | | Redhat (Strategic Developer) | ||
− | | | + | | Y |
|- | |- | ||
| Remi Schnekenburger | | Remi Schnekenburger | ||
Line 100: | Line 100: | ||
| Stephan Merker | | Stephan Merker | ||
| SAP AG (Strategic Developer) | | SAP AG (Strategic Developer) | ||
− | | | + | | Y |
|- | |- | ||
| Markus Knauer | | Markus Knauer |
Revision as of 13:45, 3 May 2016
Contents
Logistics
Meeting Title: | Planning Council Conference Call |
Date & Time: | Wednesday, April 6, 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.)
|
Members and Attendees
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
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
Announcements
- Any?
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.
Mars "left over" topics
- Requirement to use "latest Orbit" (or other pre-reqs) even in Maintenance releases
- Turns out, some projects "do not rebuild, ever, for "maintenance" so they do not use the latest Orbit.
- Is it too much to *require* that they rebuild to "pick up" new prereqs? See bug bug 487285 for why this is important. (Ideally, "new builds" with "new prereqs" would be easy to do. But, guess not always, if not used to branches, I assume.)
- - Alex promoted the proposal he wrote about on cross-project list. I will need to re-read that, and respond there. We discussed a fair amount with no resolution so will track as an on-going item.
- - I did respond to give my point of view.
- - Any thing to add?
Neon Planning (and beyond)
new business
- Cloud Category? bug 489467 -- In general a good idea, but seems little consensus on "what it is". We need a good definition of what goes into it.
old (ongoing) stuff
- Should we change "maintenance" staging name now? for Mars.2? See bug 483475.
- - [See also bug 483786 for unreleated additional URL.]
- - Still "todo" item. (i.e. not done yet, apologies for delay)
- 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?
- "Rolling release" issue.
- 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?
- What would this take? (Such as features are never "just removed" but are replaced or transitioned?)
- What testing would projects have to do?
- May become "defacto requirement" once bug 483786 is implemented.
- Seemed to be no objection to "trying it" and with Neon we will "try it" by having the "streamless-URL" proposed in bug 483786. For Neon, we will not use that URL automatically anywhere but users can add it if they would like. Will be interesting to see if many bug reports occur from people trying that "update to next main release" (that is, from Mars to Neon).
Oxygen Planning
- ?
New Business
- Draft Eclipse Project Branding Requirements (Wayne)
Next Meeting
- May 4, 2016 - Regular First Wednesday Meeting