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.
Science WG/2016 Release
Contents
Schedule
- October 21, 2016: The Eclipse Science 2016 Release
Next Action Items
- TBD
Summary
Based on March 16, 2016 email from Jay Jay Billings
At our March, 2016 Annual meeting in Reston, we decided that we would have a release of a subset of Science Working Group Projects.
The release will be called The Eclipse Science 2016 Release.
This is similar to the the simultaneous release for Eclipse Eclipse. Each participating project would release their work at the same time as a separate release. Eventually, we might create a workbench that would combine projects, but that is out of scope for October, 2016.
This "release" will be a coordinated release in which all participating projects. If possible, each participating project will release on Neon.
Todo items:
- prepare a working version of their product that can be dubbed release X.Y.Z.
- complete all IP (See the IP team's work queue), Release Review and other Foundation requirements.
- On May 6, Sharon Corbett wrote and stated that the CQs for the following products likely be done in time: Ice - 2 CQs, Triquetrum - 10 CQs, EAVP - 1 CQ. January has no CQs. There was no mention of ChemClipse.
- all artifacts for participating projects are released at the individual project sites and through links at science.eclipse.org.
- do whatever else Wayne Beaton says we have to do. ;-)
Participating projects
- Todo:
- Please add or remove your project here (in alphabetical order)
- Linking to Eclipse Wiki pages and GitHub or Bugzilla issues is preferred.
- Each project should consider
- determining a release name (0.1?) (See below)
- Collecting up IP issues, perhaps in a GitHub or Bugzilla issue
- When ready, asking for release review.
Having a project listed here is a commitment to consider the possibility of releasing at the same time. Listing a project as part of the release need not be considered cast in stone.
- ChemClipse
- ChemClipse Release Version: 0.7.0
- ChemClipse IP, release review (Search https://dev.eclipse.org/ipzilla/query.cgi for Component: technology.chemclipse):
- ChemClipse
- Apache Commons Math 3.5.0 [1] (approved)
- ConcurrentLinkedHashMap 1.4.0 [2] (approved)
- EJML 0.27.0 [3] (approved)
- Javassist 3.19.0 [4]
- jna-platform-4.1.0.jar Version: 4.1.0 (PB CQ 9292) [5]
- JSR305 1.3.9 [6] (rejected)
- OrientDB 2.0.9 [7]
- SWTChart 0.9.0 (PB CQ 8009) [8]
- SWTXYGraph 2.1.0 [9] (withdrawn, became part of Eclipse)
- Snappy Java (Xerial) 1.1.16 *SUBSET* [10]
- Maven repository for IP-approved libraries/artifacts
- Process for managing/providing IP-approved Maven artifacts
- ChemClipse IP, other requirements:
- Discuss how we can migrate our data import converters to Eclipse. Reading various data formats is essential for the ChemClipse project.
- EAVP
- EAVP Release Version: TBD
- According to 7/29/16 email from Jay, ICE will release against January.
- EAVP IP, release review and other requirements Search https://dev.eclipse.org/ipzilla/query.cgi for Component: technology.eavp):
- ICE
- ICE Release Version: TBD
- According to 7/29/16 email from Jay, ICE will release against January.
- ICE IP, release review and other requirements (Search https://dev.eclipse.org/ipzilla/query.cgi for Component: technology.ice)
- January
- January Release Version: TBD
- January IP, release review and other requirements (Search https://dev.eclipse.org/ipzilla/query.cgi for Component: technology.january): TBD (
- As of 7/29/16, only the [| initial contribution CQ (11665)] had been entered (and fixed) for January. However, Jonah Graham wrote that the CQs were discussed at EclipseCon France and that the plan was to submit the CQs by the end of June.
- 7/29/16 Email from Jonah:
- "I need to submit piggyback for a few things for January, I am not sure whether some of these have global approvals already:"
- ANTLR runtime (Jay says this is in Orbit)
-
GuavaGuice (I think, com.google.inject package) (Jay says this is in Orbit) - slf4j (Jay says this is in Orbit)
- apache log4j (Jay says this is in Orbit)
- glazed lists (Jay says this is in Orbit)
- apache commons lang (Jay says this is in Orbit)
- apache commons math3 (Jay says this is in Orbit)
- Jama (Jay is not sure if this is in Orbit)
- "I need to submit piggyback for a few things for January, I am not sure whether some of these have global approvals already:"
- Triquetrum
- Triquetrum Release Version: GitHub #71: Triquetrum First Release: 21st October 2016
- Triquetrum IP: GitHub #70: Triquetrum CQs
- Triquetrum release review and other requirements: TBD
Release Versions
Eclipse has guidelines about Release Version Naming:
Releases and IP CQs
https://wiki.eclipse.org/Development_Resources/HOWTO/Incubation_Phase says:
"Interim Releases. Incubation Phase projects may make releases. All major and minor releases must go through a Release Review."
Release Review says:
"Intellectual Property"
"Before you can consider a Release Review, all of the relevant CQs must be approved by the Eclipse Legal team. We cannot schedule a Review before the Legal team has completed their work. If you are waiting for CQs, please review where your CQs are, and when they are scheduled to be reviewed, in the IP team work queue."
On March 21, 2016, Wayne Beaton described the release process for projects in incubation:
"Projects can do releases while in incubation."
"All CQs for code/libraries that are included in the release bits must be closed/approved by the IP Team prior to the release."
"In the time leading up to the release, you can and should distribute milestone builds that includes code/libraries that the IP team has granted checkin approval for. These are not official releases, and should be annotated as such (e.g. 0.7M2)."
"I recommend that the Science Working Group make a master list of all the open CQs that are required for the coordinated autumn release that we can present to the IP Team along with your last question. This should be a relatively easy query if we have a list of participating projects. Giving the IP Team a clear picture of what needs to be accomplished is the best way of getting that question answered."