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 "CBI/Mar20 2012"
(→Minutes) |
|||
Line 16: | Line 16: | ||
− | [https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=374666 Bug 374666] | + | ===[https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=374666 Bug 374666]=== |
+ | |||
+ | Bug: Run CBI & PDE builds of platform in parallel | ||
Discussed this bug in today's cbi-dev call. The consensus was: | Discussed this bug in today's cbi-dev call. The consensus was: | ||
Line 24: | Line 26: | ||
2) SR0 with one set of qualifiers and SR1 with another would likely trigger a re-download of all platform bundles. This isn't what we want. | 2) SR0 with one set of qualifiers and SR1 with another would likely trigger a re-download of all platform bundles. This isn't what we want. | ||
− | + | ||
+ | ===M6 Rebase status=== | ||
+ | |||
+ | Thanh provided an update that he's rebased the code, and now rebasing the natives. He'll communicate any issues he runs into via. cbi-dev. | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | ===M5 or M6 packaging status=== | ||
+ | |||
+ | Markus was not present. | ||
+ | |||
+ | David questioned the emphasis on testing packaging at this point. Andrew noted it was for testing purposes and to discover any potential issues sooner rather than later. Andrew acknowledged the paradox of decreasing risk by trying packaging now but increasing the risk of the CBI dopple-ganger packages getting into the wild and causing confusion. | ||
+ | |||
+ | Agreement that it does no harm to try packaging early (i.e. now) to test, and that the emphasis should be on closing gaps to make the CBI build output the same as PDE build output. Our packages built should be kept low-profile to avoid them getting out into the wild. | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | ===Bug 355430=== | ||
+ | |||
+ | Bug: change primary builder to 4.2 | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | ===Bug 370707=== | ||
+ | |||
+ | Bug: reproducible build version qualifiers | ||
+ | |||
+ | Igor can't make it today so Andrew requested we keep discussion for this one in the Bug. |
Revision as of 12:09, 20 March 2012
Contents
Meeting
- March 20, 2012, 10am EST
- Eclipse Conference facility
Attendees
Andrew, Thanh Ha, Krzysztof Daniel (Chris), Paul Webster, David Williams, Kim Moir
Regrets:
Igor Fedorenko
Minutes
Bug 374666
Bug: Run CBI & PDE builds of platform in parallel
Discussed this bug in today's cbi-dev call. The consensus was:
1) If the qualifier(s) used for the CBI build were different, without development, the comparator tool wouldn't be useful. Conversely, with the qualifiers the same, it would work like it does today and help provide some level of confidence the builds were the same.
2) SR0 with one set of qualifiers and SR1 with another would likely trigger a re-download of all platform bundles. This isn't what we want.
M6 Rebase status
Thanh provided an update that he's rebased the code, and now rebasing the natives. He'll communicate any issues he runs into via. cbi-dev.
M5 or M6 packaging status
Markus was not present.
David questioned the emphasis on testing packaging at this point. Andrew noted it was for testing purposes and to discover any potential issues sooner rather than later. Andrew acknowledged the paradox of decreasing risk by trying packaging now but increasing the risk of the CBI dopple-ganger packages getting into the wild and causing confusion.
Agreement that it does no harm to try packaging early (i.e. now) to test, and that the emphasis should be on closing gaps to make the CBI build output the same as PDE build output. Our packages built should be kept low-profile to avoid them getting out into the wild.
Bug 355430
Bug: change primary builder to 4.2
Bug 370707
Bug: reproducible build version qualifiers
Igor can't make it today so Andrew requested we keep discussion for this one in the Bug.