Planning Council/August 06 2008

Meeting Title:	Planning Council Conference Call
Date & Time:	Thursday August 06, 2008 at 1500 UTC / 0800 SFO / 1100 NYC / 1600 London / 1700 Berlin
Dial-in:	For the call-in numbers, please see the Portal page.

Attendees

Planning Council rotating chair position
- Is the current list of PC members accurate?
Call and meeting schedule:
- Monthly until the train is rolling, then more frequently?
- In person meeting to coincide with September Board meeting (Dallas, TX), EclipseWorld, or Eclipse Summit Europe? Other time?
- December 10-11, 2008 - plenary session with Board
2009 release (a.k.a. 'Galileo'):
- must do and should do list update (deadline?)
- dates (see Ganymede Simultaneous Release)
- do we want update site, packages, or both?
- do we want to improve packaging/testing?
- naming strategy moving forward
Project Plan (format and delivery)
Board interaction
Interested in IP process improvement discussion?

[Not necessarily in order ... before the meeting, the Program Chair can blend with main list and order them depending on overall priorities.]

Do we have an accurate, active Planning Council member list?
What's the connection between simultaneous release, EPP packages, and Planning Council? That is, what is our (Planning Council) response to bug 238960? Is it "none of our business"? and EPP can do what they want? If we (Planning Council) do play a role, then what is the connection of packages to the yearly simultaneous release? That is, should we "insist" on one opportunity per year to create packages? Or, should we have more than one semi-simultaneous release to accommodate "off cycle" projects?
Let's pick a new name for the 2009 simultaneous release. Just kidding!!! But, we should discuss what the process is. Do we, Planning Council want to decide ourselves (for a 2010 release)? It appears "the community" really, really! likes participating. Should we just always have a yearly "contest" like we did the first year?
When should we document the "must do" lists for Galileo Release? I'd assume we'd want to raise the bar a bit, so should be done done soon so Projects can plan/decide if they want to and be able to participate.